ORDER

This is a petition preferred under Section 482 of CrPC seeking quashment of the order dated 06-02-2024 passed by the XVI Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Bail Application No.322/2024 moved by the respondent No.2 herein.

2 . It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the respondent No.2, who is being prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 406 of IPC, moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of CrPC before the trial Court. The trial Court while considering the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 allowed the application while directing the Police Authority to ensure adherence to the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra).

3 . It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that discretion has been incorrectly exercised by the trial Court and, therefore, instead of an application for cancellation of bail, this petition under Section 482 of CrPC has been filed in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) . Thus, the learned counsel submits that the impugned order deserves to be set aside, inasmuch as the same lacks reason and there is no discussion in the order as regards allegations which are levelled against the respondent No.2.

4. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant, perusal of the impugned order reflects that the trial Court has arrived at the conclusion that the offence under Section 406 of IPC is punishable with imprisonment for three years and concluded that the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra) are applicable in the present case and hence, the trial Court has extended the benefit of anticipatory bail to the respondent No.2.

5. In the impugned order, there are directions to the Police Authority to ensure adherence to the guidelines/directives so issued by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) . Therefore, in the considered view of this Court, if there is violation of of non-compliance of the directives issued by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (supra) in terms of the order passed by the trial Court, the applicant can always dispute the order impugned and apply for cancellation of bail, however, it appears that the applicant has approached this Court at a premature stage.

6. Thus, the present petition stands disposed of while reserving the right with the petitioner to move an appropriate application, if there is non-

compliance of the directives/guidelines issued by the Apex Court in the case Arnesh Kumar (supra).

7. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly. (MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE ac