Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/13112/2016 of NARAYAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 29 December 2016
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH) 29-12-2016 Shri Gaurav
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
MCRC-13112-2016
(NARAYANVs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
29-12-2016
Shri Gaurav Verma, learned counsel for the applicant.Shri Pushyamitra Bhargava, learned counsel for therespondent/State.
Case diary is available. Arguments heard.
This is first bail application filed by the applicant under Section439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail.
The present applicant was arrested by the Police Station Bagli,District Dewas in Crime No. 623/2016 under Sections 423, 468,471 and 120-B/34 of IPC.
According to the prosecution story, present applicant isagent/mediator of the land in respect of which the sale deedexecuted by the present applicant was found forged. It is furtheralleged that Judicial Commission was set up by the Government toenquire various allegations regarding preparation of forged saledeeds in respect of land given to oustees due to construction ofSardar Sarovar Dam on the Narmada River. In the present case,main accused is the person, who got prepared the forged sale-deed.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant wasagent/mediator. The judicial Commission set up by theGovernment found that many forged registered sale deeds wereexecuted and being agent/mediator the present applicant tookactive part in execution of such forged sale deeds. He furthersubmits that during hearing by the Judicial Commission, all thefacts and other documents were collected. Now only a formalinvestigation is to be done for which the presence of the presentapplicant is not required. However, he undertakes that the presentapplicant if granted bail would co-operate during the investigation.Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the prayer.After going through the case diary and taking into considerationthe allegation against applicant, without commenting on themerits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. The application filed under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. isallowed.
It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on hisfurnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/-(Rs.Fifty Thousandonly) and one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfactionof the concerned Magistrate for his appearance on all the dates ofhearing as may be directed in this regard during trial.
He is further directed that on being so released on bail, he wouldcomply with the conditions enumerated under section 437(3)Cr.P.C. meticulously.Certified copy as per rules.
(ALOK VERMA)JUDGE