Mohammad Jahid Khan vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J

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

Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.863/2020 registered at Police Station-Piplani, District-Bhopal (MP), for the offence

punishable under Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC.

As per prosecution case, on 17.08.2020, complainant-Varsha Malviya has filed a written complainant against the present applicant and other co-

accused person stating therein that co-accused-Dhirendra Kumar Singh is Director of SUC Builders Pvt. Ltd. and he executed a sale-deed in favour

of complainant in the year of 2010 for selling the Plot No.13 ad-measuring area 1000 Sq.Ft. situated at Village Barkheda Pathani worth Rs.4,25,000/-.

During investigation, it is found that present applicant along with other co-accused person committed cheating with the complainant and co-accused-

Dhirendra Singh obtained all the amount i.e. Rs.4,25,000/- from the complainant but the possession of the said land has not been yet delivered to him.

Learned counsel for the applicant/accused submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant/accused, aged

about 53 years, is a private Supervisor. He is breadwinner of his family. There is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution

evidence. No custodial interrogation is required in this case. He further submits that all the allegations leveled against him are false and fictitious and if

t h e applicant is arrested, it would adversely affect him mentally and psychology both and his family members would suffer irreparable loss. With the

aforesaid, he prays for allowing this bail application.

Per-contra, learned P.L. for the respondent/State opposes the bail application.

On perusal of case diary, it appears that prima facie evidence is available against the present applicant and allegations are specific therefore,

complainant has filed a complaint against the present applicant and the case has been registered under the aforesaid Section. Thus, I am not inclined to

grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. However, keeping in mind the view taken by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (Supra),

this Court is inclined to direct thus:-

However, keeping in mind the view taken by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar (Supra), this Court is inclined to direct thus:-

(i) That, the police may resort to the extreme step of arrest only when the same is necessary and the applicant fails to cooperate in the investigation.

(ii) That, the applicant should first be summoned to cooperate in the investigation. If the applicant cooperates in the investigation then the occasion of

her arrest should not arise.

(iii) That, if the applicant-accused files an application for regular bail before lower Court, then same shall be considered expeditiously as soon as

possible, preferably, on the same day.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed off. C.c. as per rules.