Roshan Lal Pathak Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1045630
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnMar-18-2013
AppellantRoshan Lal Pathak
RespondentThe State of Madhya Pradesh
Excerpt:
m.cr.c.no.1749/2013 18/03/2013 shri brahmendra pathak, advocate for the applicant. shri r.k.kesharwani, pl for the respondent/state. heard finally. this is the firs.application filed by applicant under section 438 of the cr.p.c for grant of anticipatory bail. applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with crime no.334/12, registered at police station jiyawan, district singrauli for the offence punishable under sections 323, 294, 506, 374 of ipc and section 3 (1) (10) of sc/st (prevention of atrocities) act. learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. as per prosecution, originally the dispute was for labour and during said incident it is said that applicant uttered the name of complainant by caste kol which comes under the scheduled tribes. it is further submitted that at the the time of incident the name of caste was not uttered at all by this applicant therefore, no case is made out u/s 3 (1) (10) of sc/st (prevention of atrocities) act. all other offences are bailable and triable by magistrate. he is ready to cooperate in further investigation. nothing is required to be seized from the possession of this applicant. applicant is reputed person of the society and in the event of arrest his reputation will be tarnished therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. learned counsel for the state opposes the application. considering the contention raised on behalf of parties alongwith the nature of allegation made against this applicant, i am of the view that it is a fit case to release him 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, applicant roshan lal pathak shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of rs.25,000/- (rs.twenty five thousand only) with a surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer. applicant is directed to join the investigation and fully cooperate with the investigating agency. it is further directed that applicant 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 applicant if so desires, 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
Judgment:

M.Cr.C.No.1749/2013 18/03/2013 Shri Brahmendra Pathak, Advocate for the applicant.

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

Heard finally.

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

Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.334/12, registered at police station Jiyawan, District Singrauli for the offence punishable under sections 323, 294, 506, 374 of IPC and section 3 (1) (10) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case.

As per prosecution, originally the dispute was for labour and during said incident it is said that applicant uttered the name of complainant by caste Kol which comes under the scheduled tribes.

It is further submitted that at the the time of incident the name of caste was not uttered at all by this applicant therefore, no case is made out u/s 3 (1) (10) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

All other offences are bailable and triable by Magistrate.

He is ready to cooperate in further investigation.

Nothing is required to be seized from the possession of this applicant.

Applicant is reputed person of the society and in the event of arrest his reputation will be tarnished therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the application.

Considering the contention raised on behalf of parties alongwith the nature of allegation made against this applicant, I am of the view that it is a fit case to release him 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, applicant Roshan Lal Pathak shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.Twenty Five Thousand Only) with a surety bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting officer.

Applicant is directed to join the investigation and fully cooperate with the Investigating Agency.

It is further directed that applicant 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 applicant if so desires, 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