Skip to content


Ashok Verma Vs. Tarun Ku.Saxena - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Ashok Verma

Respondent

Tarun Ku.Saxena

Excerpt:


.....grant of  anticipatory bail to the applicant. considering   the   contentions   raised   on   behalf   of   the  parties along with facts and circumstances of the case, without  expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,   i am of the  view that present is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. the  application is allowed. it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand ) with a solvent surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of arresting officer subject to compliance of terms and conditions as enumerated in section 438(2) of cr.p.c.it is further directed that applicant shall join the investigation and fully co-operate with the investigating agency. this order shall remain in force for a period of 60 days. during this period, if the applicant so desires, may move an application 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 ravi

Judgment:


M.Cr.C. No.3018/2013 18.3.2013 Shri Shivam Singh, counsel for the applicant.

Shri R.K. Kesharwani, PL for the respondent/State.

With the consent of the parties, heard finally.

This   is   an   application   under   Section   438   of   Cr.P.C   for  grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime  No.  324/2011   registered   at   Police   Station   Hoshangabad,  District   Hoshangabad   for   offences   punishable   under   Sections  498­A, 420, 120­B of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition  Act.

Learned   counsel   for   the   applicant   submitted   that   the  applicant has been falsely implicated in the case along with his  parents.

  He   has   no   criminal   past.

    His   parents   have   already  been   enlarged   on   anticipatory   bail   by   this   Court   vide   order  dated 6.12.2012 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 11849/2012. The case  of this applicant is similar to them. It is a matrimonial case and  in   the   event   of   his   arrest,   the   possibility   of   compromise  between the parties will be diminished, therefore, he prays for  grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.  Learned counsel for the State has objected the prayer for  grant of  anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Considering   the   contentions   raised   on   behalf   of   the  parties along with facts and circumstances of the case, without  expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,   I am of the  view that present is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. The  application is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand ) with a solvent surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer subject to compliance of terms and conditions as enumerated in Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.It is further directed that applicant shall join the investigation and fully co-operate with the Investigating Agency.

This order shall remain in force for a period of 60 days.

During this period, if the applicant so desires, may move an application 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 ravi


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //