Bhagirath Batham vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Milind Ramesh Phadke, J

1. The applicant has filed this first application under Section 482 of BNSS/438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.67/2025 registered at Police Station Picchore, District Gwalior for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 75 (1)(i), 296(B), 351(2) of BNS.

The case of the prosecution in nutshell is that the present applicant stopped the prosecutrix on her way while she was returning home and forcefully took her to nearby mustered field (sarso ke khet), where he sexually assaulted her. After listening her screaming when her mother in law came there to rescue her, he ran away from there.

Apprehending his arrest, the present applicant has preferred this application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant at the outset has submitted that the crime which has been registered against the applicant mentions of the offence of which the maximum sentence therein is up to seven years and in the light of the Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another reported in 2014 (8) SCC 273, wherein directions have been issued to the police authorities not to make unnecessary arrest in the offences where offences were punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend upto seven years whether with or without fine, the applicant is entitled for enlargement on bail in the event of his arrest.

It was further argued that where for an offence, the maximum imprisonment provided is 7 years or upto 7 years, the accused shall not be arrested by the police as an ordinary course of action, unless it is under a special statute mandating such an arrest or if the police finds it expedient to arrest such an accused, then before effecting any arrest in such case, it is required to record its reasons and then only the arrest could be made. On the strength of the above arguments as well as the judgments cited, it was prayed that the present petitioner/applicant deserves to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that the present applicant was not present when charge sheet was filed on 20.08.2025, therefore, the benefit of the guidelines as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Arnesh Kumar (Supra) would not be applicable to him. In the light of the aforesaid factual matrix, it was prayed that the present bail application deserves to be dismissed.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the case diary, this Court finds that the offence appears to have been registered against the present applicant under Sections 74, 75 (1)(i), 296(B), 351(2) of BNS and investigation in the matter is already complete and charge sheet is filed on 20.08.2025, therefore, the benefit of the guidelines as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Arnesh Kumar (Supra) is not available to the applicant.

In view of above, his first bail application under section 482 of BNSS in relation to Crime No.67/2025 registered at Police Station Picchore, District Gwalior for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 75 (1)(i), 296(B), 351(2) of BNS is hereby rejected with liberty to the applicant to surrender before the court below and apply for the regular bail which shall be considered by the court below in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably on the same day, if possible.