Madhya Pradesh High Court
MCRC/49309/2018 of JANI SINGH Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.No.49309/2018 (JANI SINGH VS. THE STATE OF
M.Cr.C.No.49309/2018
(JANI SINGH VS. THE STATE OF M.P.)
JABALPUR Dated : 31.12.2018
Shri P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri A.K. Singh, learned GA for the respondent/State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is first application under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Applicant Jani Singh was arrested on 22/10/2018 in Crime No.131/2018 registered at Police Station Dhuma, District-Seoni (M.P) forthe offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 34 of the IPC &6(1), 6(2) of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka SanrakshanAdhiniyam, 2000.
As per the prosecution case, on 01/07/2017 complainant KailashShivhare resident of Dhuma lodged the report at PS Gorakhpur averringthat co-accused Allu @ Virendra Sharma Director of the society ofHarsh Sakh Sahkarita Maryadit Hathital, Jabalpur in connivance withhis agents collected money from him and otherinnocent personsassuring them that they would deposit their money on daily, weekly ormonthly basis up to one year and thereafter on maturity they wouldreturn that amount to them along with interest @ 9% per annum but onmaturity the applicant and co-accused did not return that amount to theconcerned persons and closed down his office and misappropriated theamount of crore of rupees. On that police registered the Crime No.131/2018 for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 34of the IPC & 6(1), 6(2) of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton KaSanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000.It is alleged that applicant was also theagent of the co-accused Allu @ Virendra Sharma and collected moneyfrom innocent peoples.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant hasnot committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in theoffence. There is no evidence on record to show that applicant took anymoney from any person. Nither he is connected with the affairs of thesociety ofHarsh Sakh Sahkarita Maryadit Hathital, Jabalpur nor he didallure any person to deposit the money in that society. Only on thebasis of the memorandum of co-accused Virendra Sharma who was thePresident of Harsh Sakh Sahkarita Maryadit Hathital, Jabalpur Policeimplicated the applicant in the crime. Applicant is in custody since22/10/2018 and the conclusion of trial is likely to take a long time,hence prayed for release of the applicant on bail.
On the other hand learned counsel for the State opposed theprayer and submitted that the applicant and co-accused VirendraSharma runs the banking business without any permission from ReserveBank of India and other Government Department and took money frommany innocent persons who are not the member of the society on theassurance that they would return that amount to them along with interest@ 9% per annum but after the maturity period they closed down theoffice and did not return the amount along with interest, so he shouldnot be released on bail.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and as to thefact that in the case dairy statement of prosecution witnesses recordedby the Police during investigation, it is not mentioned that the applicanttook money from them, it appears that police only on the basis ofmemorandum of co-accused implicated the applicant in the crime andthe applicant is in custody since 22/10/2018 and conclusion of trial willtake time, so without commenting on the merits of the case, the
application is allowed and applicant- Jani Singh is directed to bereleased on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum ofRs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the likeamount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearancebefore the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf bythe trial Court during the pendency of trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of thefollowing conditions by the applicant :
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.
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as thecase may be;case may be;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. offence of which he is accused;offence of which he is accused; The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; andduring the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court.permission of the trial Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
(Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
V. Judge
vs
Digitally signed by VARSHA SINGH Date: 2019.01.03 10:49:01 +05'30'