Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 390 (MP)

Anil Kumar Dubey v. State of M. P.

2000-04-11

R.S.GARG

body2000
ORDER R.S. Garg, J. 1. Parties are heard. 2. Case diary of Crime No. 103/99 of Police Station Majholi (Jabalpur) in relation to offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 324/149, 294, 506 and 329/149, I.P.C., the applicant has filed this petition for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 3. The complainant Ravi Shankar lodged a report on 26-6-99 that the applicants and others armed with deadly weapons opened an assault on him. Allegations against the applicant No. 1 are that he was armed with an axe and had caused injuries to the victim on his head by means of an axe. The allegations against the applicant No. 2 and others were that they had caused injuries by means of hard and blunt object. In the first information report, it was stated that after the complainant could make his escape good and went into the house of Sarpanch the applicant and others caused injuries to the complainant. The medical report does not show any incised injury or even a cut mark on the person of the complainant. The first information report said that while fleeing away from the spot the bag belonging to the complainant fell on the spot. Almost after three months i.e., on 27-9-99, the complainant and other witnesses started asserting that not only the complainant was beaten but he was looted of his Articles including Tape recorder, Camera, Cash, Rin Pustika and such other Articles. I fail to understand how on these allegations an offence under Section 329 IPC can be made out. From the allegations if those are taken to be correct an offence punishable under Section 329 would not be made out, it may be a different thing that offence punishable under different sections may be made out. In absence of an injury caused by sharp and hard object an offence punishable under Section 324 even prima facie would not be made out. The third offence with the aid of which, the prosecution, the police wants to arrest the applicant No. 1 in Section 506 IPC. 4. Taking into consideration the property disputes pending between the parties and the manner in which the applicant and his brothers have been made liable, I consider present to be a fit case for granting an Order under Section 438 Cr.P.C.. 5. 4. Taking into consideration the property disputes pending between the parties and the manner in which the applicant and his brothers have been made liable, I consider present to be a fit case for granting an Order under Section 438 Cr.P.C.. 5. In the event of arrest of the applicant No. 1 Anil Kumar Dubey, he shall immediately be released by the officer arresting him on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rupees Seven thousand with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the said officer, for his appearance before the police authorities for purposes of investigation etc., and/or as and where so directed. 6. Application of applicant No. 2 Tanta is rejected as infructuous because he has already been arrested. 7. C.C. of the order must be supplied today itself.