Mahesh Vs. Narayan

Mahesh vs Narayan

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Mar 19, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1040416

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1040416
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Mar 19, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Mahesh

Respondent

Narayan

Excerpt

.....that learned magistrate took the cognizance on the basis of statement recorded u/s 200 and 202 of cr.p.c however, all these witnesses have yet to be cross examined on behalf of the applicants. applicants have no criminal past. they are ready to co-operate in further investigation. applicants are reputed person of the society and there is no possibility of their absconding. in the event of arrest their reputation will be tarnished therefore, they pray for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants. learned counsel for the state opposes the application. considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case alongwith the nature of allegation made against these applicants, i am of the view that it is a fit case to release them on anticipatory bail. therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicants mahesh, shyam, madan, kamlesh, dhanraj, mukesh, rajesh and pappu shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of rs.25,000/- (rs.twenty five thousand only) each with a surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer. applicants are directed to join the investigation and fully cooperate with the investigating agency. it is further directed that applicants shall abide by the conditions enumerated in section 438 (2) of the cr.p.c.this order shall remain in force for a period of 60 days. in the meantime, the applicants if so desire, may apply for regular bail before the competent court, which shall be considered by that court in accordance with law. c.c.as per rules. (g.s.solanki) judge navin

Full Judgment

M.Cr.C.No.1882/2013 19/03/2013 Shri S.B.Shrivastava, Advocate for the applicants.

Shri C.K.Mishra, GA for the State.

None for respondent Narayan despite service of the notice.

Heard finally.

This is the fiRs.application filed by applicants under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.2073/12, registered at police station Paloha Bada, District Narsinghpur for the offence punishable under sections 148, 323, 294, 506 (2),436 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in this case.

The case is arose out of the private complaint filed by respondent Narayan.

It is further submitted that learned Magistrate took the cognizance on the basis of statement recorded u/s 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C however, all these witnesses have yet to be cross examined on behalf of the applicants.

Applicants have no criminal past.

They are ready to co-operate in further investigation.

Applicants are reputed person of the society and there is no possibility of their absconding.

In the event of arrest their reputation will be tarnished therefore, they pray for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the application.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case alongwith the nature of allegation made against these applicants, I am of the view that it is a fit case to release them on anticipatory bail.

Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, applicants Mahesh, Shyam, Madan, Kamlesh, Dhanraj, Mukesh, Rajesh and Pappu shall be enlarged on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with a surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting officer.

Applicants are directed to join the investigation and fully cooperate with the Investigating Agency.

It is further directed that applicants shall abide by the conditions enumerated in Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.This order shall remain in force for a period of 60 days.

In the meantime, the applicants if so desire, may apply for regular bail before the competent Court, which shall be considered by that Court in accordance with law.

C.C.as per rules.

(G.S.SOLANKI) Judge navin

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Mahesh vs Narayan Same Subject Education