Oct 4, 2015

Arun Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arun Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 September, 2015
                                   M.Cr.C. No.8439/2015

30.09.2015


                   Shri Deepesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the

             applicant.

                   Shri Sudhanshu Vyas, learned counsel for the respondent
/State.
Case diary is available.

This is first application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. filed on behalf of present applicant for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant apprehends his arrest by Police Station - Tukiganj, District - Indore in Crime No.493/2015 under section 306 of IPC.

According to the prosecution story, the deceased and the present applicant opened a Coaching Classes in the name and style of MIICT, Infotech Research and Services Private Limited at Satna. They got recognition from Maharishi Mahesh Yogi University, Jabalpur. Subsequently, the deceased left from the Coaching Classes, as he got some job elsewhere. Some dispute arose in respect of accounts of the firm and due to which, it is alleged that present applicant harassed the deceased and instigated by that, the deceased committed suicide.

Arguments heard. Case diary perused.

Counsel for the State opposes the application. Counsel for the applicant submits that even if story of the prosecution is taken as it is, no case is made out against the present applicant, as there is no instigation or abatement on the part of the present applicant.

Taking all the facts and circumstances of the case into consideration, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find that it is fit case where the benefit of provision under section 438 of Cr.P.C. may be extended to the present applicant. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) and a solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerning Magistrate or Arresting Officer as the case may be, with the following conditions:-

(i) that he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
(ii) that he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 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 any police officer.
(iii) that he would comply with the conditions enumerated under section 437(3) Cr.P.C. meticulously.

Certified copy as per rules.
( Alok Verma) Judge Kratik
Post a Comment