Mahendra Singh Bundela vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Anjuli Palo, J

This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail.

T he applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.15/2021 registered at Police Station Excise Circle Khajuraho, District

Chhatarpur for the offences punishable under Sections 34(1), 34(2) and 36 of M.P. Excise Act.

As per prosecution's case, about 126 bulk liters of country made liquor has been recovered in presence of co-accused Veer Singh who is father of the

present applicant. At the time of recovery, applicant was not present in the house

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the co-accused has

already been enlarged on bail by the trial court. The applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and trial. In view of the aforesaid, prayer is

made to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

Learned Panel Lawyer has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the fact that the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail, without commenting on the merit of the case, the application is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest, applicant Mahendra Singh Bundela shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in a sum o f

Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like

amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer for his appearance before him during the course of investigation or before the trial Court, during trial,

as the case may be.

It is made clear that if applicant is found involved in same kind of offence in future then this bail order shall stand cancelled automatically without

further reference to the Bench. It is further directed that the applicant shall abide by all the conditions as enumerated under Section 438(2) of the

Cr.P.C.

Disposed of accordingly.