Pramod Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 November, 2017

1
M.Cr.C.No.21537/2017
(Pramod Sharma Vs. State of M.P.)

21.11.2017
Shri Sushil Goswami, Advocate for the applicant.
Smt. Sangeeta Pachouri, Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.

Case Diary is perused.

Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard.
This is first application under section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.

Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime
No.98/2017 registered at Police Station Pathari, District Vidisha for
the offences punishable under sections 509, 506 and 354 of the
IPC.

Prosecution story, in short, is that on 7/10/17, when
complainant was going to her home from Railway Station, applicant
asked her to live with him as his keep and threatened her with life.
On complainant’s refusal, he went away and when she reached her
home, she again found that applicant was present there. When
she was opening the lock, he again called the complainant her
mistress and asked to come inside. The incident was witnessed by
Neela Ram Vishwakarma and Prakash Balotia.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has
been falsely implicated in the case. Initially offences under
sections 506 and 509, IPC were registered against the applicant
and the same being bailable, he was released on bail. Later,
offence under section 354, IPC has been enhanced. Complainant
is niece of applicant, aged about 45-50 years and land dispute
prevails between them. It is also submitted that applicant had
lodged a complaint against the concerned TI on CM helpline,
enraged whereof the said TI got him beaten by some persons and
2
M.Cr.C.No.21537/2017
(Pramod Sharma Vs. State of M.P.)

implicated him in false cases. In support, learned counsel has
referred to the CM helpline receipt and various other documents.
With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for anticipatory bail is
made.

In response, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail
application and prays for its rejection.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the
case, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I
deem it appropriate to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the
applicant.

It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest of applicant
namely Pramod Sharma, he shall be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand
only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of Arresting Authority.

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

1. He will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond
executed by him;

2. He will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may
be;

3. He will not indulge in extending inducement, threat or
promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case
so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the
Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. He shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
which he is accused;

5. He will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial;
and

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

C.C. as per rules.

(S.A.Dharmadhikari)
Judge
(and)

ANAN
Digitally signed by ANAND
SHRIVASTAVA
DN: cIN, oHIGH COURT OF
M.P. BENCH GWALIOR, ouP.

D
S., postalCode474011,
stMadhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.203075c90879b30c1d
c65c29940e82075f518aa27b

SHRIVA
516e674d414bfe19dfd61d7f,
serialNumber0b2dec132d8
a109744404977f04465674ef4
056f2ee80f8bc42628783653c

STAVA
ee7, cnANAND
SHRIVASTAVA
Date: 2017.11.24 17:16:30
+05’30’

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *