High CourtsSingle Bench

Basantilal @ Banti vs State Of M.P

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 10 August 2021 · Citation: (2021) 08 MP CK 0066

HON’BLE JUDGES
Subodh Abhyankar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 438(2) · Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.39323 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

23 paragraphs · 434 words

Subodh Abhyankar, J

This is the applicant's first application under Section 438 Cr.P.C, for grant of anticipatory bail as he/she is apprehending his/her arrest in connection

with Crime No.235/2021, registered at Police Station- Daloda, District-Mandsaur for commission of the offence punishable under Sections M.P.

Excise Act.

The allegation against the applicant is that he was also involved in the aforesaid offence wherein 55 bulk liters of unauthorized liquor has been seized

from the co-accused Mohan.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case only on the basis of the memo prepared

under Section 27 of the Evidence Act at the instance of the co-accused Mohan from whom the liquor has been seized. It is further submitted that

apart from the memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, there is nothing available on record to connect the applicant with the offence. It

is further submitted that there are no other criminal case registered against the applicant, therefore, if he is arrested, an irreparable injuries shall be

caused to him. Thus, it is submitted that the application for anticipatory bail be allowed.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer however, it is not denied that there are no other material evidence available

against the applicant except the memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence Act as also there are no other criminal antecedents registered

against him.

Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the case diary, this Court finds forced with the contention raised by the counsel for the

applicant that there are no other material available on record against the applicant apart from the memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence

Act, in the considered opinion of this Court, custodial interrogation of the applicant in the present facts and circumstances of the case, is not required.

In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds it expedient to allow the present application for grant of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, this application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail, upon his/her executing a

personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) and furnishing solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer).

The applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a Police Officer, as and when required. The applicant shall further abide by the

other conditions enumerated in Sub Section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Certified copy, as per rules.