MCRC/49224/2018 of MAHESH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

M.Cr.C.No.49224/2018

(MAHESH VS. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

JABALPUR Dated : 31.12.2018

Shri Raman Patel, learned counsel for the applicant.

Shri A.K. Singh, learned Govt Advocate for the respondent/State.

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is first bail application filed by the applicant Mahesh underSection 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with CrimeNo.131/2018, registered at P.S. Gorakhpur, District-Jabalpur (M.P.) for theoffence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409/34 of the IPC and Section6(a) and 6(2) of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam,2000.

As per the prosecution case, on 01/07/2017 complainant KailashShivhare resident of Dhuma lodged the report at PS Gorakhpur averring thatco-accused Allu @ Virendra Sharma Director of the society of Harsh SakhSahkarita Maryadit Hathital, Jabalpur in connivance with his agents collectedmoney from him and otherinnocent persons assuring them that they woulddeposit their money on daily, weekly or monthly basis up to one year andthereafter on maturity they would return that amount to them along-withinterest @ 9% per annum but on maturity they did not return that amount tothe concerned persons and closed down his office and misappropriated theamount of crore of rupees. On that police registered the Crime No. 131/2018for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 34 of the IPC &6(1), 6(2) of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam,2000. It is alleged that applicant was also the agent of the co-accused Allu @Virendra Sharma and collected money from innocent peoples.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocentand has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid offence. There is noevidence on record to show that applicant took any money from any person.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

Neither he is connected with the affairs of society ofHarsh Sakh SahkaritaMaryadit Hathital, Jabalpur nor he did allure any person to deposit themoney in that society. Only on the basis of the memorandum of co-accusedVirendra Sharma who was the President of Harsh Sakh Sahkarita MaryaditHathital, Jabalpur Police implicated the applicant in the crime. The applicantis ready to cooperate in the investigation and trial. In the event of arrest, herreputation will be ruined. Under these circumstances, applicant prays foranticipatory bail.

On the other hand learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer andsubmitted that the applicant and co-accused Virendra Sharma runs thebanking business without any permission from Reserve Bank of India andother Government Department and took money from many innocent personswho is not the member of the society on the assurance that they would returnthat amount to them along-with interest @ 9% per annum but after thematurity period they closed down the office and did not return the amountalong with interest, so he should not be released on bail. According toSection 14 of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam,2000, anticipatory bail is barred. So he should not be released onanticipatory bail.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and as to the factthat the applicant was also the agent of co-accused Allu @ Virendra Sharmaand collected money from innocent peoples. Custodial interrogation of theapplicant is required. Investigation is going on. So looking to the allegationsand provisions of Section 14 of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton KaSanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to theapplicant.

Hence, this application is rejected.

vs

(Rajeev Kumar Dubey) V. Judge