SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(MP) 35

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BENCH
Sheel Nagu, Anand Pathak, JJ.
Ayush Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation – Respondent
MCRC 4659 of 2021
Decided On : 05-02-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Prashant Sharma, Learned Counsel
For the Respondent: Praveen Newaskar, Learned ASGI

The principle of 'presumption of innocence' and the importance of the accused's cooperation in the investigation and trial are crucial factors in deciding on anticipatory bail applications.

Headnote:

Anticipatory Bail - Offence of cheating and forgery in PMT Examination 2011 - Ss. 120-B, 201, 204, 408, 419, 420, 468, 471, 477-A IPC., Ss. 13(2), 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruptions Act, 1988 and Ss. 4/3D (1)(2) of M.P. Recognized Examinations Act, 1937 - Ss. 438 Cr.P.C.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a practicing Doctor, sought anticipatory bail in connection with the offence of cheating and forgery in PMT Examination 2011 conducted by VYAPAM.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the investigation in the matter was over, and custodial interrogation was not required. The petitioner had cooperated in the investigation process, and the court emphasized the importance of the gravity of the offence and the accused's cooperation in the investigation and trial.

Issues: The court considered the gravity of the offence, the conduct of the accused in cooperating in the investigation, and the prospects of doing so in the future and in trial.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principle of 'presumption of innocence' and emphasized that custodial interrogation should be avoided if the accused has joined the investigation, is fully cooperating with the investigating agency, and is not likely to abscond.

Final Decision: The court allowed the anticipatory bail application and imposed the additional condition that the petitioner, as a Shiksha Swayamsevak, shall render physical and financial assistance to a government primary school for ensuring hygiene and sanitation and for removing deficiencies of infrastructural amenities.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard through video conferencing.

2. This is first application u/S.438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail by the petitioner.

3. Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with offence punishable u/Ss. 120-B, 201, 204, 408, 419, 420, 468, 471, 477-A IPC., Ss. 13(2), 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruptions Act, 1988 and Ss. 4/3D (1)(2) of M.P. Recognized Examinations Act, 1937 registered as RC2172015S0009 (Crime No. 271/2014) pending before IV Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge CBI (VYAPAM), (M.P.).

4. Petitioner who is a practicing Doctor apprehends arrest in respect of offence of cheating and forgery in PMT Examination 2011 conducted by VYAPAM.

5. Learned counsel for CBI Shri Newaskar by filing reply informs that charge-sheet qua petitioner has been filed on 7/1/2021. Reply also reveals that petitioner has cooperated in investigation process as and when summoned by Investigating Agency and therefore custodial interrogation is not required.

6. Moreover, the principle laid down by Apex Court including the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra and others (2011) 1 SCC 694 and subsequent decisions not only emphasize the importance of gravity of offence but also the attribute of accused cooperating in investigation and trial as one of the persuading considerations while exercising jurisdiction u/S. 438 Cr.P.C. In the instant case, petitioner as is evident from reply of CBI has appeared as and when required during investigation. Thus, sending petitioner to custody in the given facts would be akin to punishing him for the offence which is yet to be established thereby violating the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence i.e. "presumption of innocence".

7. Among few important factors to be considered while deciding application for anticipatory bail are gravity of offence and also conduct of accused in cooperating in investigation and the prospects of doing so in future and also in trial. Apex court in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others (supra) in somewhat similar situation came to hold :-

    "89. It is imperative for the courts to carefully and with meticulous precision evaluate the facts of the case. The discretion must be exercised on the basis of the available material and the facts of the particular case. In cases where the court is of the considered view that the accused has joined investigation and he is fully cooperating with the investigating agency and is not likely to abscond, in that event, custodial interrogation should be avoided.

90. A great ignominy, humiliation and disgrace is attached to the arrest. Arrest leads to many serious consequences not only for the accused but for the entire family and at times for the entire community. Most people do not make any distinction between arrest at a pre-conviction stage or post-conviction stage. Whether the powers under section 438 Cr.P.C. are subject to limitation of section 437 Cr.P.C."

8. Said judgment has been referred with approval in subsequent decision of Apex Court in Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth Vs. State of Gujarat & Another (2016)1 SCC 152 and also in Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (Nct of Delhi) and another (2020) 5 SCC 1 but with certain reservations in regard to the aspect of imposition of conditions while granting anticipatory bail.

9. After hearing learned counsel for rival parties and considering the fact that investigation in the matter qua petitioner is over and thus custodial interrogation is not required and that petitioner appears to have participated in the investigation by appearing as and when summoned, this court without entering into merits of the matter lest it may prejudice learned trial judge, this court deems it appropriate to confirm and continue the interim order passed by this court on 27.01.2021 till finalization of the trial subject to the following additional condition:-

The petitioner as a Shiksha Swayamsevak shall render physical and financial assistance to gover

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top