Applicant is arrested for the offences under sections 212 and 216 IPC and sections 11 and 13 of the Madhya Pradesh Dakaiti Aur Vyapharan Prabhavit Kshetra Adhiniyam, 1981 (hereinafter, referred to as the Adhiniyam).

Preliminary objection is raised by the counsel for the State that under section 5(2) of the Adhiniyam, if objection is raised by the State then the applicant is not eligible for grant of bail. On this ground alone, trial Court has rejected the bail application.

Counsel for the applicant submitted that to attract the provisions of the Adhiniyam, act or acts constituting the offence mentioned in the schedule of the Adhiniyam must have nexus with commission of the dacoity and this nexus must exist at the time when the act or acts are committed for constituting the "specified offence". In support of his contention, counsel for the applicant has placed reliance upon Full Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Gulabchand Kannoolal v. State of M.P. and ors. [1982 JLJ 170 = 1982 MPLJ 7].

Counsel for the applicant has invited attention to the definition of the word dacoit in section 2(b) of the Adhiniyam, which is reproduced below :"dacoit" in relat