MCRC/51473/2018 of ATUL BHARGAV Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 31 December 2018

The High Court Of Madhya PradeshMCRC-51473-2018

(ATUL BHARGAVVs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)

1

[31][-][12][-][2018]Jabalpur, Dated :

Shri Abhay Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant.

Ms. Namrata Agrawal, Govt. Adv. for the respondent/State.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

This is third application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. as theapplicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.36/2018registered at Police Station Timarni District Harda for the offence punishableunder Sections 420, 120-B and 409 of the IPC.

First application filed by the applicant was dismissed by this Courtvide order dated 20/07/2018 passed in M.Cr.C No.22292/2018 and secondapplication was dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 28/08/2018passed in M.Cr.C No.31029/2018.

wasAs per prosecution case, co-accused Subhash Chandra Pare, the President / Manager of Krishak Vikray and Vipnan Sahakari Samiti,Timarni, Distt. Harda. In the year 2017-2018 during summer session between15/06/17 to 23/06/17 Krishak Vikray and Vipnan Sahakari Samiti, Timarni,Distt. Harda had purchasing 91037.81 quintal Moong and 4171.50 quintalUrad pulses from farmers on minimum Support Price under the scheme. Inthe audit it was found that co-accused Subhash Chandra Pare, President /Manager of Krishak Vikray and Vipnan Sahakari Samiti, Timarni, Distt. Hardain connivance with applicant and other co accused in order to secure benefitfor themselves committed several irregularities and illegalities in procuring thepulses and misappropriated the pulses worth Rs. 58,46,832.25/-. On that,police registered Crime No.36/2018 for the offences punishable u/s 420 of theIPC, in which applicant apprehends his arrest.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocentand has falsely been implicated in the case. There is no evidence on recordto connect the applicant with the offence in question. The applicant is readyto cooperate in the investigation and trial. Although, earlier bail applicationfiled by the applicant was dismissed on merit, but now the applicant is readyto deposit the defalcated amount, so he be released on anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer.

First application filed by the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn bythis Court vide order dated 20/07/2018 passed in M.Cr.C No.22292/2018 andsecond application was dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated28/08/2018 passed in M.Cr.C No.31029/2018 and thereafter, there is no change in the circumstance.

It appears from the record that at the relevant time the applicant wasposted as Assistant Manager of Krishak Vikray and Vipnam Sahkari Samiti,Timarni District Harda. Keeping in view the allegation levelled against theapplicant that he was involved in the crime and caused loss to the publicexchequer in connivance with other co-accused persons, this Court is notinclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, M.Cr.C is rejected.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY)V. JUDGE

pb

Digitally signed by PRASHANT BAGJILEWALE Date: 2019.01.01 22:57:51 -08'00'