High CourtsSingle Bench

Rameshwar Patel vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 7 April 2021 · Citation: (2021) 04 MP CK 0027

HON’BLE JUDGES
Akhil Kumar Srivastava, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 201, 420, 467, 468, 471
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.12874 Of 2021
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

7 paragraphs · 300 words

Akhil Kumar Srivastava, J

This is the first application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail.

The applicant apprehends his arrest in    connection with Crime No.375/2019 registered at Police Station-Adhartal, District - Jabalpur (M.P.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 201, 34 of IPC.

The allegation against the present applicant is that the applicant has committed fraud against the complainant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the applicant along with other co-accused persons have deposited the entire amount jointly. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal past and no custodial interrogation is required in this matter. The applicant is ready to cooperate with investigation and shall abide by all the conditions which may be imposed by this Court; hence, prays for anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the bail application. Heard rival contentions of the parties and perused the entire documents along with case diary. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the co-accused has been enlarged on bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. Crime has been registered in the year 2019. From the very lodging of the FIR, present applicant is absconding. He has neither appeared before the Investigating Officer nor assisted in the investigation. So far as, other co-accused persons who are enlarged on bail are concerned, they are granted bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., they have not been given the benefit of anticipatory bail, therefore, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case in which benefit of granting anticipatory bail to the applicant may be exercised.

Accordingly, this application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. stands dismissed.