Gulab Rai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1045609
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnMar-18-2013
AppellantGulab Rai
RespondentThe State of Madhya Pradesh
Excerpt:
m.cr.c.no.1968/2013 18.3.2013 shri anil khare, sr.counsel with shri r.s.khare for the applicant. shri r.k.kesarwani, pl for the state. this is the firs.bail application filed by the applicant under section 438 of the cr.p.c.for grant of anticipatory bail. the applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with crime no.13/2013 registered at p.s.prathvipur, district tikamgarh for the offence punishable under section 34(2) of the m.p.excise act. learned sr.counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is falsely implicated in this case. the applicant is a licence holder of rajapur. the alleged wine was being transported under due permit. documents (a-2 to a-5) have been filed in this regard. the alleged liquor has also been seized from the possession of co-accused sudama. statement of co-accused is not admissible against the applicant. the applicant is ready to co-operate in the investigation and trial. the applicant is a reputed citizen of the locality, in the event of arrest, his reputation will be tarnished, therefore, he be enlarged on anticipatory bail. learned counsel for the state has opposed the application. i have perused the case diary. according to the prosecution, when the vehicle of the accused persons was intercepted by the police, one of them fled away from the spot and co-accused sudama has been arrested. thereafter, on further enquiry, it was found that the applicant was the person, who fled away from the spot, therefore, he is required for further investigation. considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the tendency of the investigating agency to facilitate the main accused to flee away from the spot, i do not find it a fit case to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. application is hereby dismissed. (g.s.solanki) judge pb
Judgment:

M.Cr.C.No.1968/2013 18.3.2013 Shri Anil Khare, Sr.Counsel with Shri R.S.Khare for the applicant.

Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State.

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

The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.13/2013 registered at P.S.Prathvipur, District Tikamgarh for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of the M.P.Excise Act.

Learned Sr.Counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is falsely implicated in this case.

The applicant is a licence holder of Rajapur.

The alleged wine was being transported under due permit.

Documents (A-2 to A-5) have been filed in this regard.

The alleged liquor has also been seized from the possession of co-accused Sudama.

Statement of co-accused is not admissible against the applicant.

The applicant is ready to co-operate in the investigation and trial.

The applicant is a reputed citizen of the locality, in the event of arrest, his reputation will be tarnished, therefore, he be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.

I have perused the case diary.

According to the prosecution, when the vehicle of the accused persons was intercepted by the Police, one of them fled away from the spot and co-accused Sudama has been arrested.

Thereafter, on further enquiry, it was found that the applicant was the person, who fled away from the spot, therefore, he is required for further investigation.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the tendency of the investigating agency to facilitate the main accused to flee away from the spot, I do not find it a fit case to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

Application is hereby dismissed.

(G.S.Solanki) Judge PB