Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 497 (MP)

Lalita Prasad v. State of M. P.

2015-04-27

SHEEL NAGU

body2015
ORDER 1. This is first bail application under section 438 of CrPC filed by the petitioners. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.36/2015 registered at Police Station, Station Road, District Morena, for the offences punishable under sections 457, 380 and 441 of IPC. 2. Learned panel lawyer for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. 3. The allegation against the applicant is of theft after house trespass. It is alleged that the victim was a tenant in the godown standing over the land owned by the petitioner. The petitioner is alleged with breaking open the godown and taking away large number of fertilizer bags behind the back of the petitioner. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on account of certain dispute between the petitioner and the victim. 4. Learned counsel for the victim pointed out that in fact this case is of dacoity but the Police has registered much lesser offence in favour of the petitioner only after direction of this Court passed in Writ Petition No.34/2015 dated 7.1.2015. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the victim (Mahesh Semil) has been granted anticipatory bail on 17.11.2014 passed in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.9891/2014 arising out of the same incident where the petitioner is the victim who has alleged use of abusive words and for forgery against victim herein in a dispute over the same godown. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents except that one mentioned in the case diary which arise out of same incident. 6. In view of the above, this Court though is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants but with certain stringent conditions in view of the pendency of the case. 7. It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.2,00,000/­ (Rupees Two lac only) with two solvent sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority. 8. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicants :­ 1. 8. This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicants :­ 1. The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by them ; 2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be; 3. The applicant will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be; 4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused; 5. The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and 6. The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investing Officer, as the case may be. 7. Looking to the pendency of the case, the applicants will mark their attendance at the concerned police station twice in a week. A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance.