Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 241 (MP)

Heesabuddin v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2023-02-08

SUBODH ABHYANKAR

body2023
JUDGMENT Subodh Abhyankar, J. - They are heard. Perused the case diary / challan papers. 2. This is applicant'™s first application under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail, as the present applicant is apprehending his / her arrest in connection with Crime No.554/2022 registered at Police Station MG Road, Indore District Indore (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471, 477 (A) and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The allegation against the applicant is that he happens to be a Cashier in Indore Municipal Corporation, Indore and it is alleged that in the National Lok Adalat, which took place in the District Court on 12.11.2022, the applicant and other accused persons extended undue benefit to the property holders in respect of property tax. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is no allegation against the applicant that he in any way got benefited with the aforesaid discount given to the property holders and there is no allegation against him by any of the property holders that he obtained any gratification for extending the benefit of discount. 5. Counsel has submitted that the only irregularity if committed by the applicant is that he gave rebate on the entire amount of tax, in stead of surcharge only. 6. Counsel has also submitted that even otherwise, the applicant is ready to cooperate with the investigation and no purpose would be served in sending the applicant behind the bar; and thus, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. Thus, it is submitted that the applicant be released on anticipatory bail. 7. Counsel for the respondent / State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer. However, it is not denied that there is no allegation against the applicant that he personally got benefited with the aforesaid act. 8. Having heard counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case diary, this Court finds force with the contentions raised by the counsel for the applicant; and also finds it expedient to allow the present anticipatory bail application, as the custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear necessary. 9. Accordingly, the application stands allowed. 8. Having heard counsel for the parties and on perusal of the case diary, this Court finds force with the contentions raised by the counsel for the applicant; and also finds it expedient to allow the present anticipatory bail application, as the custodial interrogation of the applicant does not appear necessary. 9. Accordingly, the application stands allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant Heesabuddin S/o Shri Allauddin Qureshi shall be released on bail, upon executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-(rupees twenty five thousand only) and furnishing solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer). 10. The applicant shall make himself / herself available for interrogation by a Police Officer, as and when required. He / she shall further abide by the other conditions enumerated in Sub Section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 11. Accordingly, Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.6210/2023 stands allowed. 12. Certified copy as per rules.