Madhya Pradesh High Court
Krishnabihari Tiwari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 6 January, 2016
MCRC-13821-2015
(KRISHNABIHARI TIWARI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR)
06-01-2016
Smt. Uma Kushwah learned counsel for the applicants.
Shri Kuldeep Singh, learned PL the respondent/state.
The case diary is available.
This is first bail application filed by the applicants/accused under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicants are apprehending their arrest by PS Bhiterwar district Gwalior in connection with Crime No.282 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Section 323, 294, 506B and 34 of IPC and 3 (1)
(x) of the Sc St Act.
Learned counsel for the applicants-accused submits that except the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Sc St Act, remaining offences are bailable. So far as the aforesaid offence is concerned, there is no evidence on record against the applicants- accused to connect them with the said offence. The counsel further pleads that as per prosecution story, when complainant Narayan Koli belonging to the scheduled caste was irrigating his filed at 9 PM on 25.11.2015 along with his son, the applicants- accused came there and dispute arose between them and he was assaulted by them abusing him with reference to his caste. The counsel further contends that in order to attract section 3 (1) (x) of Sc St Act, alleged insult or intimidation must be done with intent to humiliate particular community and merely calling by caste is not sufficient to constitute the offence. On the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel for the applicants has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned PL opposing the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants, has prayed for it's rejection. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. On perusal of the contents of the FIR, the submissions made on behalf of the applicants-accused appear to be sound. Considering the facts and circumstances mentioned above and the judgment rendered by this court in the case of Ummed Singh and others Vs. State of M.P. And another 2013 (1) MPLJ (Cri) 601, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is hereby directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants by arresting officer or by the court, the applicants-accused shall be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) each with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicants :-
1. The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them;
2. The applicants will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. The applicants will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicants/accused shall appear before the investigating officer within 15 days from the date of this order failing which, effect of the order shall stand vacated automatically;
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance. C.c. As per rules.
(M.K. MUDGAL) JUDGE