High CourtsSingle Bench

Ravi vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 15 July 2021 · Citation: (2021) 07 MP CK 0128

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Verma, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 438(2) · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 294, 323, 326, 354, 506
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.34563 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

22 paragraphs · 418 words

Anil Verma, J

This first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in

connection with Crime No.122/2021 registered at police station- Kurawar, District-Rajgarh for the offence punishable under Sections 354, 294, 323,

506 and 326 of IPC.

As per the prosecution story, on 03.04.2021, the complainant launched an F.I.R. that at about 7 p.m. when she was going to attend marriage function

at Pyarelal's house, the applicant caught her right hand with bad intention. After reaching his home, she told such story to her cousin Badri Prasad and

when Badri Prasad tried to make the present applicant understand, he gave a fist blow on his face because of which his one teeth has been broken

and after the MLC report, Section 326 of IPC has been enhanced in the offence.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in the offence. He further submits

that no weapon has been used by the applicant and he was released on bail by the trial court and thereafter Section 326 of IPC has been enhanced by

the prosecution. Hence, learned counsel prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection with a submission that the offence under

Section 326 is non-bailable and serious in nature.

After considering the above submissions and material available in the case-diary and also keeping in view the fact that the applicant was already

released on bailable in the bailable offence under Section 354 of IPC and later on, as the offence under Section 326 of IPC has been added on the

basis of medical report to the effect that injured Badri Prasad sustained injury because of which his one teeth has been broken, offence under Section

326 of IPC is not made out, the bail application for anticipatory bail is allowed.

Accordingly, in the event of arrest, applicant -Ravi be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs. Thirty

Thousand) along with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of arresting officer for his appearance before the Investigating Officer during

the course of investigation as and when directed. Conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. shall also apply on the applicant during currency of bail.

With the aforesaid, the application stands disposed of.

Certified copy, as per rules.