Madhya Pradesh High Court
Charan Singh Parihar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 August, 2018
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA No.5268/2018
Jabalpur,
Dated:07.08.2018
Shri Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Mohit Nayak, learned Government Advocate for
respondent No.1/State.
None for respondent no.2/victim, though served. Heard.
This is an appeal filed under Section 14-A (1 & 2) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the impugned order dated 07.07.2018 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities), District Chhatarpur (M.P.) in bail application No.125/18 whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed.
The appellant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.178/2018 registered at Police Station Lavkush Nagar, District Chhatarpur (M.P.), for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 294, 336 & 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r)(s) & 3(2) (5A) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The allegation against the present appellant is that he assaulted and abused the complainant by name of caste, who belongs to the scheduled caste community.
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, this appeal be allowed by setting-aside the impugned order and appellant be 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 2 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 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 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 concerned to observe the guidelines and directions given by 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 4.4.2018.
C.C. as per rules.
(Subodh Abhyankar) Judge vc Digitally signed by VARSHA CHOURASIYA Date: 2018.08.08 10:27:12 +05'30'