Mehantri Yahake vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(MP) 1189

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vishal Dhagat, J.
Mehantri Yahake & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 58101, 58402 of 2022
Decided On : 09-12-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Sharad Verma, Advocate, C. S. Parmar, Advocate, Narendra Nikhare, Advocate
Final Result : Allowed

Headnote:
Anticipatory Bail - Offences under Indian Penal Code - The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants, considering their gender, willingness to cooperate in the investigation, and the fact that the alleged offences were punishable with a maximum sentence of 3 years.
Fact of the Case:

The applicants filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with a case involving various offences under the Indian Penal Code. The state opposed the application, stating that the applicants had blocked a public way.
Finding of the Court:

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants, considering their gender, willingness to cooperate in the investigation, and the fact that the alleged offences were punishable with a maximum sentence of 3 years.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicants should be granted anticipatory bail in connection with the alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the gender of the applicants, their willingness to cooperate, and the nature of the alleged offences in granting anticipatory bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the anticipatory bail applications and directed the applicants to join the investigation and cooperate with the investigating agency.

JUDGMENT

Vishal Dhagat, J. - These are the first bail applications filed on behalf of the applicants/accused under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail, as they are under apprehension of their arrest, in connection with Crime No.464/2022, registered at Police Station Lakhnadon, District Seoni (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 353, 332, 147, 148, 149, 151, 152, 336 and 427 of Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submitted that applicants are women aged about 38 and 50 years. It is further submitted that applicants were not part of the mob which has blocked public road. Applicants have falsely been implicated in the case. Offences are punishable with maximum sentence of 3 years. It is submitted that applicants will not abscond from law and will co-operate in investigation of the case. In these circumstances, it is prayed that applicants be released on anticipatory bail.

3. Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the State opposed the application for grant of bail. It is submitted that applicants had blocked public way. Blocking public way is not in any way protest in democracy. Said act influence the public at large, therefore, anticipatory bail application be dismissed.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. Considering the fact that applicants are woman and they will not abscond from law and will co-operate in investigation and offences alleged are punishable only upto 3 years of sentence, anticipatory bail applications filed by the applicants are allowed.

6. It is directed that in the event of arrest of applicants in connection with the aforesaid crime number and the offences, they be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer/Arresting Authority.

7. The applicants are directed to join the investigation immediately and to co-operate with the investigating agency. They will further abide by the condition enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

8. Certified copy as per rules.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document