Surendra Yadav vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(MP) 566

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Nandita Dubey, J.
Surendra Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 61767 of 2022
Decided On : 02-01-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Vishnu Dwivedi, Advocate, Somesh Gupta, Advocate
Final Result : Allowed

Headnote:
Anticipatory Bail - Misuse of Government Scheme - The court allowed the application for anticipatory bail considering that two co-accused persons had already been granted bail on the same set of facts.
Fact of the Case:

The applicant filed for anticipatory bail in connection with a case registered for the offence of storing wheat to misuse a government scheme. The trial Court had rejected the applicant's application, citing his role as the Centre Incharge.
Finding of the Court:

The court allowed the applicant's application for anticipatory bail, noting that the two co-accused persons had already been granted bail on the same set of facts.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the applicant's bail application by the trial Court based on his role as the Centre Incharge.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the fact that the two co-accused persons had already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the trial Court on the same set of facts as a basis for allowing the applicant's bail application.
Final Decision: The court directed that the applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety, and comply with the provisions of Cr.P.C. regarding anticipatory bail.

JUDGMENT

Nandita Dubey, J. - This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

2. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.121/2021 registered at Police Station Gadhimalahra, District-Chhatarpur for the offence punishable under Sections 420,120-B and 34 of IPC.

3. The allegation against the present applicant is that he stored 50 quintals of wheat along with other co-accused persons in the purchase centre to misuse the scheme of the Government.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the application filed by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been rejected by the trial Court, whereas the other co-accused, namely, Gourishankar Arjariya and Aakash Awasthy have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the trial Court, on the same set of facts. It is stated that the trial Court has rejected his application only because the applicant was the Centre Incharge.

5. Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State has opposed the bail application. However, he has fairly submitted that the allegation against all the three persons is similar in nature.

6. Considering that aforesaid two co-accused persons have already been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the trial Court on the same set of facts, this application is also allowed.

7. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer.

8. It is further directed that the applicant shall also comply with the provisions of Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C., and cooperate in the investigation as well as in the trial Court and will remain present before the concerned authority as and when he is called. In case, if he does not cooperate in the trial or in the investigation, this bail order will stand cancelled, automatically.

Certified copy as per rules.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document