IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH AT INDORE
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
Babulal @ Babudiya – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 3804 of 2023
Decided On : 23-01-2023
Anticipatory Bail - Offences under MP Govansh Vadh Pratishedh Adhiniyam and M.P. Krishi Upyogi Pashu Sanrakshan Adhiniyam - The court allowed the application for anticipatory bail, directing the release of the applicant on certain conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed for anticipatory bail during trial for offences related to illegal transportation of govansh and other criminal provisions. The police recovered 63 govansh from the vehicle, out of which 9 were found dead.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the application for anticipatory bail, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Issues: The issues involved the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant, who was implicated based on the statement of a co-accused and had no seized possessions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the identical case of a co-accused who was granted anticipatory bail and the lack of seized possessions from the applicant, leading to the decision to allow the application for anticipatory bail.
Final Decision: The court directed the release of the applicant on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a personal bond and a local surety, with specific conditions to be complied with, and the automatic cancellation of the bail order in case of any further case against the applicant.
JUDGMENT
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J. - This is first application under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, filed by the applicant for grant of anticipatory bail during trial in connection with Crime No.07/2022 registered at Police Station- Jaora City, Jaora District- Ratlam concerning offence under Sections 4, 6, 9 of MP Govansh Vadh Pratishedh Adhiniyam, and Section 4, 6 10 of M.P. Krishi Upyogi Pashu Sanrakshan Adhiniyam and Section 11(D) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act and Sections 419, 482, 468, 471 and 473 of IPC.
2. As per prosecution story, the police has recovered 63 govansh from the vehicle and out of which 9 were found dead. Hence, the police has registered the case against co-accused Mubarik and the applicant is implicated in the matter on the basis of statement of co-accused Mubarik recorded under Section 27 of Evidence Act.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the identically placed co-accused Ansar @ Raja has been granted anticipatory bail. The present case is identical to the case of the co-accused. He further submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been implicated in the present crime on the basis of statement of co-accused persons recorded under Section 27 of Evidence Act. Nothing has been seized from the possession of the present applicant. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application by submitting that the applicant and the co-accused were transporting the Govansh illegally and there is one criminal record of the applicant under the provisions of IPC. Hence, he is not entitled for bail.
5. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the material available on record including the case diary, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this application is allowed
6. It is directed that in the event of his arrest, the applicant be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer with the following conditions:-
(i) that he shall make himself available for interrogation by police officer as and when required.
(ii) that he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
(iii) that he would comply with the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, meticulously.
(iv) in case of registration of any further case under any provision of law against the applicant, this order shall stand cancel automatically without further reference to this Court.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
The court applied the legal provision under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant based on the circumstances and material available on record.
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 the nature of allegations and the circumstances of the case, including the status of co-accused.
Grant of anticipatory bail based on the consideration of false allegations and the existence of a dispute between the parties.
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 court's discretion to grant anticipatory bail based on the nature of the accusation, the need for custodial interrogation, and the presence of ....
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced at the bar.
Grant of anticipatory bail based on the suspicious nature of the prosecution story and the claim of innocence by the applicant's counsel.
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.