Jitu and another vs State of Madhya Pradesh

This is the first anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. before this Court filed by the applicants in relation to Crime No.47/2018

registered at Police Station Daboh, District Bhind, in reference to offences punishable under Sections 452, 323, 294, 323, 506 and 34 of IPC, his first

anticipatory bail application has already been dismissed vide order dated 23.05.2018 by Additional Sessions Judge, Lahar, District Bhind, whose

certified copy is annexed with the application under consideration.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that Gyanabai, who is mother of the present applicant Jitu, lodged the FIR in police station bearing Crime

No.46/2018, whose certified copy is annexed with the application under consideration. According to the report of the co-accused Gyanabai, she was

beaten by Jagmohan, Mintu, Mikki, Baby Chawla and her family members. Jitu and Rikki also received injuries in the incident and firstly co-accused

Gyanabai lodged FIR against complainant party, thereafter, Baby also lodged counter FIR against Gyanabai, Jitu, Vinay and Sunil Gupta, stating that

Jitu inflicted injuries on her by iron pipe. The incident occurred in the alleged car parking of the complainant in front of house of the present applicants.

It is also argued that this Court vide order dated 17.05.2018 passed in M.Cr.C. No.18410/2018 granted benefit of anticipatory bail to the co-accused

Gyanabai and the case of the present applicants is not more serious then abovementioned co-accused Gyanabai as no grievous injury is found to any

of the injured person, hence, it is prayed that in view of cross cases registered against both the parties and injuries sustained by family members of

both the parties, therefore, the benefit of anticipatory bail may be given to the applicants.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor and counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer and submits that according to MLC report of

complainant Baby Chawla, she received incised wound over her head and injury was found in radiological examination. It is further argued that the

benefit of anticipatory bail granted to co-accused Gyanabai because of being a lady and the case of the present applicants is not similar to her,

therefore, anticipatory bail of the present applicants may be rejected.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, but without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is

directed that in the event of their arrest, the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety of same amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority (Investigating Officer), applicants- Jitu and

Sunil Kumar Gupta be released on anticipatory bail with following conditions:-

Applicants will cooperate in investigation and will remain present at intimated place and time by investigating officer.

Applicants will not commit any offence in future,

Applicants will not try to influence prosecution witnesses of case in any manner.

The applicants are directed to appear before the Investigating Officer of the case on or before 22.06.2018 for interrogation. He shall further abide by

the other conditions enumerated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

Certified copy as per rules.