MCRC/13150/2016 of SANJEEV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2016

Arguments

MCRC-13150-2016

(SANJEEVVs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

29-12-2016

Shri Sanjay Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for theapplicant Sanjeev in M.Cr.C. No. 13150/2016.

Shri P.K. Bhatt, learned counsel for the applicantJaswant Kumawat in M.Cr.C. No. 13178/2016.Shri P.M. Bhargava, learned counsel forrespondent/State.

Case-diary is available.

Arguments heard.

This common order shall govern the disposal ofM.Cr.C. No. 13150/2016 filed on behalf of applicantSanjeev S/o Sureshchandra Ji & M.Cr.C. No.13178/2016 on behalf of applicant Jaswant KumawatS/o Umashankar Ji Kumawat.

These are first applications filed by the applicantsunder Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant ofanticipatory bail.

The applicants apprehends their arrest by Police Station-Dindayal Nagar District Ratlam in Crime No.85/2016, under Section 139 of Indian Electricity Actand Section 3 of the Explosive Substance Act.

According to the prosecution story due to blasting conducted by the present applicants one electric poleof 11 K.V. was damaged and electric supply wasdiscontinued in five villages.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that initially the present applicants were arrested for theoffence under Section 139 of the Indian ElectricityAct and granted regular bail by the trial Court.However, subsequently offence under Section 3 ofthe Explosive Substance Act had been added.Apprehending their re-arrest applicants havepreferred these applications for grant of anticipatorybail.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State vehementlyopposes the applications and prays for dismissal ofapplications.

After taking into consideration the facts andcircumstances of the case, without commenting onthe merits of the case, these applications filed underSection 438 of the Cr.P.C. are allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest, theapplicants shall be released on anticipatory bail upontheir furnishing a personal bond in the sum ofRs.30,000/-(Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only)each and one separate surety of the like amount tothe satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate orArresting Officer as the case may be, with thefollowing conditions.

I.that they shall make themselves availablefor interrogation by a Police Officer asand when required.for interrogation by a Police Officer asand when required.

II.that they shall not , directly or indirectly,make any inducement, threat or promisemake any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the factsof the case so as to dissuade him fromdisclosing such facts to the Court or toany Police Officer.

III.that they would would comply with theconditions enumerated under Section437(3) of the Cr.P.C. meticulously.

Accordingly, the applications stands disposed of.Certified copy as per rules.

(ALOK VERMA)JUDGE