AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
These applications are filed under section 438 of the Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail as the applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.24/2016 registered by Economic Offences Wing, Ujjain for the offence punishable under sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 474 & 120-B of the IPC.
The investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of these applications. In support of his contention he has placed reliance over the order dated 26.02.2020 passed by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in MCRC No.7293/2020 in which it has been held that once the charge sheet has been filed and warrant has been issued the application under section 438 is not maintainable. The aforesaid view is based on the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the case of State of M.P vs. Pradeep Sharma (2014) 2 SCC 171. The operative part of the order is reproduced below:
A co- ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of passed in MCRC No.4357/2017 has held as under:-
In the opinion of this Court, issuance of proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C is not very material but in fact the spirt of the law is that if a person is absconding and is running away from the law enforcement agencies and the Court, then he is not entitled for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. When the investigation is pending and if the person is running away from the Investigating Agency, then it can be said that he has a reasonable apprehension of his arrest and, therefore, during the pendency of the investigation, the application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail would be maintainable but once the charge sheet is filed invoking Section 299 of Cr.P.C and the Magistrate has issued the warrants against the accused, then in the considered opinion of this Court, the application for grant of anticipatory bail would not be maintainable in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of State of M.P vs. Pradeep Sharma (2014) 2 SCC 171.
In view of the above, learned Senior Counsel for the applicants prays for withdrawal of these applications with liberty to surrender before the competent Court.
Learned Senior Counsel submits that the EOW has made all the sleeping Directors of the Institution as accused in this case who has no involvement in the day to day working of the college. He further submits that immediately after receipt of the notice from the Government the entire amount collected by the institution as scholarship has been returned and a declaration to that effect has been filed by the Government before the High Court in the pending PIL. He further submits that some of the Directors are senior citizens and if they are arrested they will loose their reputation, therefore, the trial Court be directed to consider their applications on the same day.
In view of the above, the applications are dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. The trial Court is directed to consider the bail applications of those applicants who are sleeping Directors of the Institution and senior citizens on the same day.
C.c as per rules.