Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/3902/2024 of BABLU@CHANDRAPRAKASH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDOREBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUBODH ABHYANKARON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 3902 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
BABLU@CHANDRAPRAKASH S/O TUFANSIGHKUSHWAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCUPATION:AGRICULTURE 33, PACHU KI CHAAL BEHIND HOTELAMALTAS INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
SHRI VISHAL PATEL, ADVOCATE
.....APPLICANT
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSEOFFICER THROUGH P.S. TEJAJI NAGAR (MADHYAPRADESH)
SHRI MUKESH SHARMA, GOVT. ADVOCATE
.....RESPONDENTS
This application coming on for order this day, the court passed thefollowing:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
They are heard. Perused the case-diary.
2 ] This is applicant's second application filed under Section 438 ofCriminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail, as he isapprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.339/2020 registered atPolice Station Tejaji Nagar, District Indore (MP) for offence punishable underSections 420,34,467,468,,471,120-B,202 of I.P.C. His earlier anticipatory bailapplication in respect of offences under Section 420, 34 of IPC was allowedby a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.09.2020 passed in M.Cr.C. No.29749/2020.
3] Counsel for the applicant has submitted that thereafter the matter was pending for completion of investigation, and recently on 18.1.2024 the chargesheet has been filed under Sections 467,468,120(B),471,202 of IPC and thefollowing sections were also added in the charge sheet. It is further submittedthat the applicant is apprehending that since the earlier application was inrespect of Section 420/34 of IPC, the applicant might be arrested, if hesurrenders before the trial Court despite the fact that he has already cooperatedwith the investigation. Thus, it is submitted that the applicant be released onanticipatory bail.
4] Counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer.
5] Having considered the rival submissions, perusal of the case-diary, theearlier order dated 16.09.2020 passed by the coordinate Bench of this Court in M.Cr.C. No.29749/2020, and the subsequent events, this Court is inclined toallow the present application as the custodial interrogation of the applicant isnot necessary,.
6] Accordingly, without reflecting anything on the merits of the case, this application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant shallbe released on bail, upon his executing a personal bond in the sum ofRs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) and furnishing onesolvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer(Investigating Officer).
7] The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a PoliceOfficer, as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditionsenumerated in Sub Section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of CriminalProcedure, 1973.
das
Certified copy as per rules.
(SUBODH ABHYANKAR)JUDGE