High CourtsSingle Bench

Rameshchandra Sharma vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 22 January 2024 · Citation: (2024) 01 MP CK 0094

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sunita Yadav, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 438(2) · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 420, 467, 468, 471
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 2773 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 379 words

Sunita Yadav, J

This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail relating to FIR No.06 of 2024 registered at Police Station Jaura, District Morena (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC.

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. This is a case of civil nature and the prosecution is trying to give it the colour of criminal case. It is further argued that applicant - accused has not signed the alleged agreement to sell. Even if the case of the prosecution is accepted, ingredients of Sections 467, 468 and 471 of IPC do not attract and at the most offence under Section 420 of IPC is made out. Further argument is that in the revenue Court, the proceedings are pending, however, present applicant - accused has not been arrayed as party in that revenue case and in the agreement to sell, no financial transaction has been done. Further argument is that applicant is ready and willing to abide by all the terms and conditions which may be imposed by this Court while granting anticipatory bail. Applicant is the permanent resident of District Morena (M.P.) having no criminal history and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Hence, prayed to allow the anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and prayed for its dismissal.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the case diary available on record.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lakh Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Investigating Authority.

The applicant shall further abide by other conditions enumerated under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and shall cooperate in the investigation otherwise this bail order shall automatically stand cancelled.

Certified copy as per rules.