Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 609 (MP)

Brajendra Singh Bes v. State of M. P.

2014-05-26

B.D.RATHI

body2014
Judgment Heard. 2. Perused the Case Diary. 3. This is first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of applicant- Brajendra Singh Bes for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.05/2014 registered against him at police station Ajak, Datia, District Datia for commission of offences punishable under Sections 352, 294, 506-B of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act [ in short ' SC & ST At'']. Crime was registered on the basis of written complaint filed on 03/03/2014 by Ku. Vimlesh Vanskar. Besides that, another allegation was also alleged against the applicant that he has abused in filthy language by saying “Bararwali” to Ku.Vimlesh Vanskar and on these words, offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST Act was registered. 4. Prayer for bail was made on the ground that except offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST Act, other offences are bailable and only by saying words “Bararwali”, no ingredients for commission of offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST Act is made out against the applicant. 5. Prayer for bail was opposed by learned Public Prosecutor on the ground that near about seven criminal cases were registered against the present applicant and the applicant is a habitual offender. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail and his application deserves to be rejected. 6. It is submitted by Shri Visoriya, learned counsel for the applicant that in most of the cases, the applicant has been acquitted. Copy of certain judgments were filed in support of his contention. It is also submitted by Shri Visoriya that actually the applicant is doing social service and is Parshad in Municipal Corporation, Datia. Therefore, only during some Andolan, cases were registered against the applicant. Looking to this case, also no case is made out against the applicant for non-bailable offence. After perusal of entire case and taking into consideration the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant, hence, the application is allowed. Looking to this case, also no case is made out against the applicant for non-bailable offence. After perusal of entire case and taking into consideration the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant, hence, the application is allowed. 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.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority/I.O., subject to compliance of the conditions enumerated under Section 438(2) as well as Section 437(3) of Cr. P. C. 7. In case of violation or breach of the aforesaid conditions, the applicant shall be taken into custody forthwith. 8. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Police Station for necessary compliance. Certified copy.