VISHAL BANSAL Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the first application under Sec. 438 of the Cr.P.C filed by the applicants, who apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.457/2023 dtd. 18/7/2023, registered at Police Station Thatipur, District Gwalior, for the offences punishable under Ss. 294, 195-A, 506, 34 of IPC.

(2.) It is the submission of learned counsel for the applicants that earlier complainant lodged an FIR against the applicants which was registered vide Crime No. 325/2021 by Police Station University, District Gwalior for offence under Ss. 365, 366-A, 376, 506 of IPC and Sec. 3 /4 of POCSO Act, in which applicants were extended benefit of bail by the trial Court itself. In fact, the applicants have lend a loan to mother of prosecutrix during lockdown and when they demanded their money back, the aforesaid false case has been got registered and when in that case, applicants were extended benefit of bail by the trial Court itself, to put the applicants behind the bar again, this false case has been got registered on false pretext. Applicants are innocent and falsely implicated on the basis of registration of offence as referred above. Complainant is wife of applicant No. 1 Vishal. Complaint has been lodged on 18/7/2023 stating the incident of dtd. 13/7/2023 and no plausible explanation regarding delay in lodging the FIR has been given. Applicants were not present on spot at the time of alleged incident, and in support their of their call details report has also been filed. Applicants do not have any criminal past and if they do not extended the benefit of anticipatory bail then they will have to face social inconvenience.On these grounds, prayer for anticipatory bail is made out.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer made by the applicant and prayed for its rejection.