High CourtsSingle Bench

Kamal Pandey vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 12 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 MP CK 0063

HON’BLE JUDGES
Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.1695 Of 2022

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 240 words

Deepak Kumar Agarwal, J

The applicant has filed this first bail application u/S.438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.132/2021 registered at Police Station Ghatigaon, District Gwalior (M.P.) in relation

to the offence punishable under Sections 34(1) 34(2) 49(A) of M.P. Excise Act.

In brief the prosecution case is that on 13.12.2021 at 4.30 PM, on the information of informer, Police Sub Inspector of Ghatigaon, A.S.I. Aditya

Shukla raided the premises behind Devnarayan mandhir, Ghatigaon, from there he seized 400 liter OP unauthorized liquor and one bullero pickup on

the spot. Co-accused Sunil Gurjar and present applicant Kamal Pandey was there. Looking to the Police party, applicant-accused ran away. Sunil

Gurjar was arrested. Thereafter, offence under Sections 34(1) 34(2) 49(A) of M.P. Excise Act. Was registered.

Applicant-accused is absconding from the date of incident. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely

been implicated in the offence, hence prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

Learned State counsel has opposed the bail application and prays for its rejection.

As per case diary five crime in Ghatigaon, Bhawarpura and Panihar have already registered against him.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties at length and perused the case diary.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. The bail application is rejected.