Ashok Yadav vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.

This is Second application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail. The first bail application of the applicant was allowed by this Court vide order dated 20/11/2018 passed in M.Cr..C.No. 37093/2018, but during investigation, the police has enhanced the offence punishable under Section 409 of IPC, therefore, the applicant is apprehending his arrest, hence, this second bail application has been filed by the applicant.

Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime No.65/2018 registered at Police Station Kachnar, District Ashoknagar, for the offence punishable under section 420 & 409 of the IPC.

Prosecution story, in short, is that the applicant, while working as Panchayat Secretary was put under suspension for certain charges levelled against him. During suspension, the applicant made a payment for which he was not authorized, thus committing fraud. Further during investigation, the prosecution has enhanced the offence punishable under Section 409 of IPC against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. There is no averment in the complaint that any loss has been caused due to the act of the applicant. The work done was got examined and in the inquiry, it was found that the work was done for the amount which had been paid. It is submitted that the applicant is already facing the departmental enquiry and allegation of fraud against the applicant is not made out. It is further submitted that in the charge sheet, the charge under section 409 of IPC is added by the prosecution, but no case for the offence under Section 409 of IPC is made out against the applicant. It is further submitted that during the time of alleged payment made by the applicant, at that relevant time, the financial charge was with Gram Rojgar Sahayak and the applicant has nothing to do with the same, hence, the allegation of payment during suspension period was not found proved against the applicant. The applicant is a permanent resident of Village Mullaverkhedi, P.S.Kachnar, Tahsil and District Ashoknagar, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, if extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. Wth the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is made.

In response, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and prays for its rejection.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest of applicant namely Ashok, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by applicant:-

He will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;

He will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

He shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

He will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;

and

He will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

If, the applicant commits any offence after being released on bail, then this bail order shall automatically stands cancelled without further reference to this Court.