Back
VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Pramod Sethi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
Vijay Kumar Shukla, J.
This is second application under section 438 of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 307/2020 registered at P. S. Tukoganj, Indore for offence punishable under sections 420, 406 and 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE and under section 6(1) of the M. P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as “Adhiniyam”). The first application was filed jointly with co-accused with Raghav Sethi vide M.Cr.C. No. 33001/2022. The said application was withdrawn with liberty to file separate application for the applicants. The application was dismissed with the aforesaid liberty. Thereafter the present application has been filed separately on behalf of the applicant Pramod Sethi.
2. An objection has been raised regarding maintainability of anticipatory bail application in view of the provisions of section 14 of Adhiniyam, 2000. The provisions of section 14 of the Act reads as under :—
The court clarified that anticipatory bail may be granted under section 438 when no prima facie case exists, despite statutory bars.
Point of Law : Accused has every right, even if he is arrested in number of cases, to move in each of offence registered against him irrespective of the fact that he is already in custody.
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail under the SC/ST Act, necessitating an appeal against the Special Court's decision if bail is denied.
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is an extraordinary remedy, granted only in exceptional circumstances, particularly when the applicant is not a proclaimed offender.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
