CHANDRABHAN KALOSIYA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is first application under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.247/2022, registered at Police Station-Silwani, District- Raisen, (M.P.) for offences punishable under Ss. 294, 323, 354 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that applicant was issued notice under Sec. 41-A Cr.P.C. by Police Station Silwani. He co- operated in investigation of case and after completion of investigation, notices were issued to applicant to remain present before the Court for filing of charge-sheet. Counsel for applicant submitted that trial Courts are not considering application for bail under Sec. 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure on ground that applicants are not in police custody and in many cases, trial Courts are sending accused persons in jail. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant relied on Apex Court judgment reported in (2022) 1 SCC 676, Siddharth vs State of Uttar Pradesh and another. Para 5 of this judgment is quoted as under:-

(3.) It is submitted that applicant filed application for grant of anticipatory bail because applicant was under apprehension that as per prevalent practice, applicant's application under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. may be rejected as he is not in custody and he may be sent to jail. In these circumstances, he filed application under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C.