High CourtsSingle Bench

Vishan Gupta And Ors vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 20 February 2020 · Citation: (2020) 02 MP CK 0124

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 438(2) · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 306
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 7044 Of 2020
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

29 paragraphs · 561 words

This is first application under Section 438 of CrPC for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.90/2019 registered at Police Station G.R.P., Morena, District Morena for offence

under Section 306/34 of IPC.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants, namely, Vishan Gupta, Smt. Sheetal Garg, Anuj Gupta, Amit Agarwal and Sonu Shivhare that the

applicants are innocent. They have not committed any offence. They have been falsely implicated in the case. There is no any instigation to the

deceased to commit suicide on the part of the applicants. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicants prays for grant of anticipatory

bail to the applicants. No mens-rea of the applicants is reflected in the matter. The alleged amount in question is very meagre. Learned counsel

undertakes that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by the Investigating Officer as and when required and shall not

directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or coercion to the persons acquainted with the facts of the case so as to deceive them from

disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Investigating Officer and will fully co-operate and if required will produce the documents before the police

and will regularly appear before the trial Court. Under these circumstances, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.

Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations

and the material available on record, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

Considering the submissions advanced, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,

this Court deems it appropriate to allow this bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed by the applicants. It is hereby directed that in the event

of arrest, the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) each with one solvent

surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer/Investigating Officer.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicants :-

1.

The applicants will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2.

The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required. They shall further abide by the other

conditions enumerated in sub-Section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

3.

The applicants will not indulge themselves in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to

dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be ;

4.

The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5.

The applicants will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6.

The applicants will not leave India without previous permission of trial Court/ Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned for compliance as well as copy of the order be given to the learned Panel Lawyer with a direction

to keep the same in the concerned case diary.

Certified copy as per rules.