High CourtsSingle Bench

Vishnu Kumar vs State Of M.P

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 17 June 2021 · Citation: (2021) 06 MP CK 0139

HON’BLE JUDGES
Subodh Abhyankar, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438, 438(2) · Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 8, 15, 25, 29 · Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 279, 337
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 29479 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

23 paragraphs · 432 words

Subodh Abhyankar, J

This is the applicant's first application under Section 438 Cr.P.C,1973, for grant of anticipatory bail, as he/she is apprehending his/her arrest in

connection with Crime No.59/2020, registered at Police Station-Gandhi Sagar, District- Mandsaur (M.P) for commission of the offence punishable

under Sections 8/15, 25, 29 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

The allegation against the applicant is that he was involved in the aforesaid offence wherein 54 kg.of Poppy straw has been seized from the

possession of the main accused Gangaram and who has given the memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence Act naming one Gopal as a

person from whom the said contraband was purchased by him and subsequently when Gopal was also arrested he named the present applicant as a

person from whom a part of the contraband was purchased from him.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that except the memo prepared under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and that too by an accused

who is not the main accused there is no other material evidence available on record to connect the applicant with the offence. It is further submitted

that the final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficiently long time. Counsel has further submitted that if the applicant is arrested, irreparable

injuries shall be caused to him. Thus, it is prayed that the applicant be released on anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and it is submitted that there are one another case under Section 279, 337 of

the IPC also pending against the applicant.

Having considered the rival submissions and this Court finds forced with the contentions raised by the counsel for the applicant, in the considered

opinion of this Court, custodial interrogation of the applicant in the present facts and circumstances of the case, is not required.

In view of the aforesaid, this Court finds it expedient to allow the present application for grant of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, this application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail, upon his/her executing a

personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) and furnishing solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the

Arresting Officer (Investigating Officer).

The applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a Police Officer, as and when required. The applicant shall further abide by the

other conditions enumerated in Sub Section (2) of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

With the aforesaid, this M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.