IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT GWALIOR
Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J.
Sunny Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 21613 of 2022
Decided On : 02-05-2022
Anticipatory Bail - Offences under IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act - The court allowed the application for anticipatory bail, considering the nature of allegations and the fact that co-accused have already been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by the trial Court.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for anticipatory bail in connection with a case registered for offences under Sections 498-a, 294, 506, 34 of IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition act. The applicant denied committing any offence and claimed false implication.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the application for anticipatory bail, considering the nature of allegations and the fact that co-accused have already been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by the trial Court.
Issues: Grant of anticipatory bail under the mentioned sections of IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the nature of allegations and the fact that co-accused have already been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by the trial Court in allowing the anticipatory bail application.
Final Decision: The application for anticipatory bail was allowed, and the applicant was directed to comply with specific conditions upon release.
JUDGMENT
Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J. - The applicant has filed this first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.157 of 2022 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Morena in relation to the offences punishable under Sections 498-a, 294, 506, 34 of IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition act.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in the case. There is no specific allegation against the applicant and there are only omnibus and vague allegations levelled against the applicant. It is further submitted that the co-accused persons have been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by the trial Court. The applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigation and ready to abide by all the conditions which may be granted by this Court while granting anticipatory bail. Hence, prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.
Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions and submitted that considering the nature of allegations, the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the case diary as well as documents available on record.
Considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that co-accused have already been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by the trial Court, without commenting on merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer/Investigating Officer.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant:-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. He shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in sub-Section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of trial Court/ Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
This anticipatory bail application stands disposed of in above terms.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for information.
Certified copy as per rules/directions.
The court may grant anticipatory bail based on the nature of allegations and the circumstances of the case, including the status of co-accused.
The court's decision was influenced by the timing of the incident, the filing of the FIR, and the applicant's willingness to cooperate in the investigation in granting anticipatory bail.
Grant of anticipatory bail based on the consideration of false allegations and the existence of a dispute between the parties.
Grant of anticipatory bail based on the absence of material against the applicant and imposition of specific conditions for the grant of bail.
The court may grant anticipatory bail based on factors such as the age of the applicant and the lack of overt act in the alleged offence.
The court may grant anticipatory bail after considering the seriousness of the charge, the applicant's cooperation in the investigation, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant accused in connection with the FIR registered for offenses punishable under Sections 323, 498(A), 1....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.