Madhya Pradesh High Court
Deendyal Kushwaha vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 May, 2018
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-2907-2018
(DEENDYAL KUSHWAHA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
3
Jabalpur, Dated : 25-05-2018
Shri L.C.Chourasiya, Advocate for the appellant.
Shri GS Thakur, GA for the respondent/State.
Heard.
sh This is an appeal filed under Section 14-A of the SC / ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the impugned order dated 15.3.2018 passed by the e ad Special Judge under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Sagar District Sagar in bail application no.49/18 whereby the application filed by the Pr appellant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
a hy The appellant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 116/18, Police Station - Maharajpur, District Chhattapur, offences registered ad under sections 294, 323, 506 of I.P.C. and under Section 3 (1) (d) (dh), 3 (2) M (5) (k) of the SC / ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
of The allegation against the appellant is that he assaulted and abused rt and threatened to the life of the complainant who belongs to the scheduled caste community.
ou C It is submitted that the appellant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case. There is no material to establish the offence. Hence, h ig this appeal be allowed by setting-aside the impugned order and appellant be H enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Learned GA opposing the submissions made on behalf of the appellant has prayed for rejection of the anticipatory bail and also stated that in view of the averments in the FIR and other evidence collected during investigation, all the ingredients are established and disclosing commission of offence punishable under Section SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities)Act. Hence, the appeal be disallowed.
Having considered the contentions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, in view of this court, prima facie it is established that the appellant has committed the aforesaid crime. Hence, in view of provisions of Section 18 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, he is not entitled to get the benefit of anticipatory bail. Hence, the prayer is rejected.
Learned counsel has also submitted that the concerning Police officer be directed to observe and record the reason necessary for the arrest of the appellant as per the direction of the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs. State of Maharashtra and another passed in Criminal appeal no.416/2018 decided on 20.3.2018 and by this Court in Ajeet Jain vs. State of M.P. passed in Criminal appeal no. 1757/2018 decided on sh 4.4.2018, so that the appellant may not be harassed by unnecessary arrest. The prayer seems to be reasonable. As prima facie looking to the nature of e ad the offence, the appellant's arrest is not warranted. Hence, in case of his arrest by the competent authority, it is expected from the Police officers Pr concerned to observe the guidelines and directions given by the Apex court in a the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs. State of Maharashtra hy and another passed in Criminal appeal no.416/2018 decided on 20.3.2018 and by this Court in Ajeet Jain vs. State of M.P. passed in Criminal appeal ad no.1757/2018 decided on 4.4.2018.
M Certified copy as per rules.
of rt (J. P. GUPTA) V. JUDGE ou C h Digitally signed by MANZOOR AHMED ig Date: 2018.05.26 09:20:04 +05'30' Ansari H