Uchhablal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2023

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Uchhablal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 August, 2023

Bench: Prem Narayan Singh

                                                               1
                            IN     THE        HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                    AT INDORE
                                                      BEFORE
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
                                                 ON THE 18 th OF AUGUST, 2023
                                            MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 36110 of 2023

                           BETWEEN:-
                           UCHHABLAL S/O HASTIMAL MAHAJAN, AGED ABOUT
                           75 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS SAGARMAL MARG,
                           KHACHROD DISTRICT UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI ROMESH DAVE, ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION KHACHROD
                           DISTRICT UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                              .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI PRANAY JOSHI, PANEL LAWYER)

                                 This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                                ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

2. This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail relating to FIR/Crime No. 571/2020 dated (not mentioned), registered at Police Station-Khachrod, District-Ujjain (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 339(C) of M.P. Municipalities Act and Section 420 of IPC added in investigation.

3 . The applicant is apprehending his arrest in the aforesaid crime, has Signature Not Verified knocked the portal of this Court for grant of anticipatory bail.

Signed by: VINDESH RAIKWAR Signing time: 19-08-2023 12:57:08 2

4. Allegation against the applicant is that he is also involved in the aforesaid offence under Section 339(C) of M.P. Municipalities act.

5 . Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the prosecution agency has not arrested the applicant but they have issued only notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C., but in view of the order of learned Magistrate First Class, he has apprehension of arrest in this case. Learned counsel has also placed a copy of another order of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ujjain dated 04.07.2023, wherein, learned Magistrate has sent the accused therein in jail. That apart, he has also contended that the applicant is aged about 75 years. Investigation has been completed. It is further submitted that Section 339(C) of Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 has already been deleted in effect of the fact that the provisions of Section 172 of the Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 has been deleted from the Act. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the investigating agency has not complied with the directions of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar [(2014) 8 SCC 273]. Hence, in view of aforesaid circumstances, the order of anticipatory bail is called for.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent/State has contemplated that since there is protection under the law laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar [(2014) 8 SCC 273] has already been given by issuing notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C, therefore, benefit of anticipatory bail is not required to be given to the applicant. However, it is fairly admitted that Section 339(C) has now been contaminated because concerned provision of Section 172 of MPLRC has been deleted.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINDESH RAIKWAR Signing time: 19-08-2023 12:57:08 3 and circumstances of the case and also the age of the applicant and the act attributed to the applicant, I am of the view that it is a fit case in which applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. Consequently, this application for anticipatory bail filed on behalf of applicant is hereby allowed.

8. It is directed that in the event of arrest applicants be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Authority. The applicants shall comply 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 he from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

(iii) the applicant shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-Section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

(iv) failure of compliance of any of the aforesaid conditions, shall entail dismissal of bail order automatically.

Certified copy, as per rules.

(PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE Vindesh Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINDESH RAIKWAR Signing time: 19-08-2023 12:57:08

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madhya Pradesh High Court