"Unbecoming Of Elected Representative": MP High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Councillor Booked For Destroying Public Properties

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently denied bail to a sitting Councillor, Atamdas who has been booked for an offence that took place in the year 2018 wherein he, alongwith other co-accused, had led an unruly mob of 700- 800 persons who were protesting against the ratio of a decision of Apex Court.

Allegedly, they were protesting against the Top Court's ruling in the case of Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan Vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) 6 SCC 454 under the impression that the decision was against the interest of the SC/ST community.

In this matter, the Supreme Court had issued directions to "prevent the misuse of SC/ST Act".

Apprehending his arrest in connection with offence punishable u/S. 147, 148, 149, 336, 186, 353 and 332 IPC, he approached the High Court, wherein, the bench of Justice Sheel Nagu dismissed his plea underscoring that he had demeaned the dignity attached to the office of Councillor.

Essentially, a large number of public and private properties were destroyed during that agitation (in which the petitioner took part) and even the tempo of life in the town of Gwalior came to a standstill. Against this backdrop, the Court observed thus:

"What is most surprising in this case is that petitioner despite being a sitting Councillor behaved in a highly irresponsible manner instigating members of his community to indulge in arson and looting leading to widespread damage to private and pubic property. The record reveals that petitioner did nothing to prevent members of his community from committing offences. Instead the petitioner instigated them. Prima facie the act of petitioner, to say the least, was unbecoming of an elected representative."

However, the Court did note that none of the offences alleged against the petitioner attracts more than three years of imprisonment, but is cognizable and nonbailable.

Lastly, the Court did note that even though the benefit of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar 2014 (8) SCC 273 can very well be extended to the petitioner but, looking to the culpable behaviour of the petitioner who has demeaned the dignity attached to the office of Councillor, the Court declined anticipatory bail to him.

Accordingly, his pre-arrest bai plea was dismissed.

Case title - Atamdas Vs. State of M.P

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order