Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/48339/2018 of TRIVENI PRAJAPATI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018
Court Of Madhya PradeshThe High Court Of Madhya Pradesh MCRC-48339-2018
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.
The High Court Of Madhya PradeshMCRC-48339-2018
(TRIVENI PRAJAPATIVs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
[31][-][12][-][2018]Jabalpur, Dated :
Shri Pramod Thakre, counsel for the applicants.
Shri Pramod Choubey, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is Second application of the applicants Triveni Prajapati andRampal Mahra filed under section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail in connectionwith Crime No.381/2016 registered at Police Station Kotwali, DistrictAnuppur for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 34 of IPC and Section 6 (1) of Madhya Pradesh Nikshepakon Ke HitonKa Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000.
First bail applications of the applicants were dismissed on merit videorder dated 04.10.2018 in M.Cr.C.No.34735/2018 &M.Cr.C.No.34739/2018.
As per the prosecution case, police registered Crime No.381/2016 atPolice Station Anuppur, District Anuppur for the offence punishable underSections 420, 467,468, 471, 120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC andSection 6 of The Madhya Pradesh Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka SanrakshanAdhiniyam, 2000 against the, C.M.D., M.D., Branch managers and agents ofthe R.B.N. Infrastructures India Limited. The general allegations againstapplicants Triveni Prajapati and Rampal Mahra and co-accused persons ofthe case are that they had collected money from 103 persons assuring them todouble their money within five and seven years. However, they did not paythe money even after the maturity periods. On the other hand, they closeddown the company office and thus cheated the innocent people. The specificallegations against the applicants and co-accused are that they are the agentsof the company and collected Rs.2026800/- from 103 persons cajoling theminto buying the products of the companies to get high returns.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have not committed any offence and have falsely been implicated in the offence. Earlierbail applications of the applicants have been dismissed on the ground thatinvestigation is going on vide order dated 04.10.2018 M.Cr.C.No.34735/2018 & M.Cr.C.No. 34739/2018. Now, the charge sheethas been filed and the applicants are in custody since 01.09.2018 andconclusion of the trial is likely to take a long time, hence prayed for release ofthe applicant on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that earlierbail applications of the applicants were dismissed by the Court on merits.Since then there is no change in circumstances. So, they should not bereleased on bail.
First bail applications were dismissed on merits vide order dated04.10.2018 in M.Cr.C.No.34735/2018 & M.Cr.C.No.34739/2018. Since thenthere is no change in circumstances except the custody period.
In the case diary statements of the prosecution witnesses, it ismentioned that the applicants who are the Agents of the RBN InfrastructureIndia Ltd. assured the innocent people that on their investing the amount inthe Company on completion of period of five and seven years, they willreturn back double the amount invested by the investors. Applicants alongwith other co-accused persons took Rs.2026800/- from the innocent peopleand thereafter close down the office of the company and embezzled theamount received from the innocent people. So looking to the facts andcircumstances of the case, this court is not inclined to grant bail to theapplicants at this stage.
Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY)V. JUDGE
(ra)