Madhya Pradesh High Court
Amraram Choudhary vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 9 May, 2022
Author: Rajendra Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajendra Kumar Verma
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
ON THE 9th OF MAY, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 16169 of 2022
Between:-
AMRARAM CHOUDHARY
S/O DEVARAM CHOUDHARY,
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: FARMING
R/O. VILLAGE KARANI JHAWAR JODHPUR,
(RAJASTHAN)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI RAHUL MAHESHWARI, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
STATION HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH
POLICE STATION BHAVGARH
DIST.:MANDSAUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY MS. MAMTA SHANDILYA, GOVT. ADVOCATE )
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.
T h e applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.113/2021 registered at Police Station Bhavgarh, District Mandsaur (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 379 and 414 of IPC, 1860; Sections 4 and 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 SUMATHI JAGADEESAN and Section 18(1) of the M.P. Minerals (Prevention of Illegal Mining, Digitally signed by SUMATHI JAGADEESAN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51a5432c9ce6df4c49ae55625 1c6a1b1fca11a86643b2a2, pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F748B6F8C1E18D805F7FACD 91F2, serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD4DF2469FAAFF13E836178 C3C81533BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD337B, cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN Date: 2022.05.09 18:17:22 +05'30' 2 Transportation and Storage) Rules, 2006.
As per prosecution story, on 22.05.2021, a surprise inquiry conducted by Collector (Mining) Mandsaur at Survey Nos. 1054 & 1059 at Village Khodana, initiated proceedings against the driver of the vehicles and seized the vehicles. Applicant is the owner of the seized dumper and is implicated on the basis of memo of co-accused persons recorded under Section 27 of Evidence Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the matter. The applicant is the owner of the seized dumper and he has been implicated on the basis of memorandum of co-accused persons recorded under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. Apart from this there is no other evidence available on record to connect the applicant with the present crime. Nothing has to be seized from the possession of the applicant. The applicant is ready to co-operate with the investigation. On the aforesaid grounds, the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the respondent/State on the other hand has opposed the bail application but fairly concedes that except memorandum under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, there is no other incriminating evidence against the applicant.
I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the material available on record including the case diary, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this application is allowed SUMATHI JAGADEESAN It is directed that in the event of his arrest, the applicant be released on Digitally signed by SUMATHI JAGADEESAN anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51a5432c9ce6df4c49ae5562 51c6a1b1fca11a86643b2a2, pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F748B6F8C1E18D805F7FAC D91F2, serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD4DF2469FAAFF13E836178 C3C81533BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD337B, cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN Date: 2022.05.09 18:17:46 +05'30' 3 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with two local sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer with the following conditions:-
(i) that he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
( ii) that he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
(iii) that he would comply with the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, meticulously.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA))
JUDGE
sumathi
SUMA Digitally signed by SUMATHI
JAGADEESAN
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF
MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
THI
INDORE, ou=JUDICIAL,
postalCode=452001, st=Madhya
Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=2c031063fea95cabb51a5
432c9ce6df4c49ae556251c6a1b1f
JAGAD
ca11a86643b2a2,
pseudonym=BEF252392AFC4F748
B6F8C1E18D805F7FACD91F2,
serialNumber=28E58B6FE482FD4
DF2469FAAFF13E836178C3C8153
EESAN
3BF4D0F8641FFAB3DD337B,
cn=SUMATHI JAGADEESAN
Date: 2022.05.09 18:18:17 +05'30'