Ashok Yadav And Others vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J

 This is first application filed by the applicants Ashok Yadav and Rampal Yadav under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

Applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.82/2021 registered at Police Station-Jeron District-Nivari (old District-

Tikamgarh) (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294 and 353 read with section 34 of the IPC and Section 51(kha) Disaster Management

Act and Section 3 of Mahamari Adhiniyam.

As per prosecution case, on 09.05.2021, complainant Meera Sahu was posted as Anganwadi worker, Nivari. Due to Covid-19, Pandemic, she had

gone with other officials to the village, Luhurguva. She asked to the present applicants-accused about health, due to Covid-19 Pandemic, applicants-

accused abused them and tried to assault them due to which they did not discharge their duties.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants-accused have been falsely implicated in this case. They have no previous criminal

antecedent. No custodial interrogation is required in this case. It is the time of Covid-19 Pandemic, due to which social distancing is very necessary.

Applicants-accused are bread earner of their family, if they will be arrested then future of their family will be spoiled. There is no probability of their

absconding or tampering with the evidence. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicants prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.

Learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State opposes the prayer of the applicants.

After hearing both the parties and the fact that at the time of incident complainant was performing her duties, at that time, applicants-accused used

criminal force, so it is not proper case to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail.

Since, the offences involved in the case are not punishable with more than 7 years of imprisonment and Section 41(1) of Cr.P.C. provides that the

offences for which punishment prescribed is imprisonment for a term upto seven years, the accused may be kept in custody only if the condition

enumerated in Section 41(1)(b)(ii) of Cr.P.C. exist. In Arnesh Kumar's case [(2014) 8 SCC 273] , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:-

..........the arrest effected by the police officer does not satisfy the requirements of Section 41 of the Code, Magistrate is duty bound not to authorise

his further detention and release the accused......"".

In view of the observations laid down in the judgment referred above, I deem fit to direct as under :

(i) That, the police may resort to the extreme step of arrest only when the same is necessary and the applicants fail to cooperate in the investigation.

(ii) That, the applicants should first be summoned to cooperate in the investigation. If the applicants cooperates in the investigation then the occasion of

their arrest should not arise.

(iii) That, if the applicants-accused are arrested and they wants to file an application for regular before lower Court, then they will be produced before

the lower Court without any delay. Lower Court is also directed to consider his bail application as expeditiously as possible, preferably, on the same

day.

Accordingly, in view of aforesaid, this petition is disposed off with the aforesaid directions.

C.C. as per rules.