Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajeet Kumar Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 30 November, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 MP 1680
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C.No.48638/2019 (Ajeet Kumar Jain Vs. State of M.P.)
Gwalior, Dated:-30.11.2019
Shri R.K. Sharma, learned Senior counsel alongwith Shri
Sanjay Gupta and Shri V.K. Agarwal, learned counsel for the
applicant.
Shri Sanjeev Mishra, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Shri Ramkrishan Pathak, learned counsel for the complainant. Heard on I.A.No.9610/2019, an application under Section 301 (2) of Cr.P.C.
For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and Shri Ramkrishan Pathak, learned counsel and his associates is permitted to assist the prosecution.
Case Diary is perused.
Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. This is first bail application under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 263/2019 registered at Police Station Vishwavidyalaya, District Gwalior (M.P.) for the offences punishable under sections 406, 420, 504 and 506 of the IPC.
Prosecution story in short is that complainant is the partner in M/s Indersingh & Sons and M/s Gyani and Company. The applicant, 2 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.No.48638/2019 (Ajeet Kumar Jain Vs. State of M.P.) his wife Smt. Pushpa Jain and his son Vimal Jain borrowed some money from the complainant for their business. Complainant gave loan to the applicant and his wife through different cheques on different dates amounting to Rs. Seventy Five Lacs in lieu of the aforesaid amount, applicant and his wife issued cheques in favour of the complainant towards the repayment of the loan, but some cheques were dishonourned by the Bank, whereby the applicant and co- accused have played fraud with the complainant. On the aforesaid basis, crime has been registered against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is a senior citizen of 78 years and has falsely been implicated in the matter. He is suffering from multiple diseases i.e diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease and disease of kidney, and therefore, he is not in a position to move properly and also unable to perform his daily routine on his own. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that if the applicant is arrested then his health and reputation would be adversely affected. The FIR does not contain as to when money was borrowed and when the cheques were dishonourned. For establishing the charge Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC, the mens-rea and malafide intention on the part of the accused has to be shown. The dispute is of civil nature, therefore, mere failure to keep promise subsequently can not be presumed as an act leading to cheating. It is 3 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.No.48638/2019 (Ajeet Kumar Jain Vs. State of M.P.) further submitted that it is a growing tendency in business circle to convert civil dispute into criminal cases. Applicant is permanent resident of Alkapuri, City Center, Gwalior (M.P.). Applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial, if he is extended benefit of anticipatory bail and prays for anticipatory bail on these grounds.
Learned Public Prosecutor as well as the complainant opposed the bail application and submitted that investigation is pending and custodial interrogation of the applicant may be required. Infact the total transaction was for Rs. 2.25 Crores, out of which the amount of Rs. 1.50 Crores has already been paid whereas Rs.75 Lacs is outstanding. The applicant is in habit of playing fraud which is evident from the FIR alleged against them in other cases as well. Since intention of the applicant and co-accused was to defraud and prays for rejection.
Taking into consideration the facts and looking to the age of applicant and there is no absconsion of his tampering, but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I deem it appropriate to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant.
It is hereby directed that in the event of arrest of applicant, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees One Lac only) with two solvent local surieties each of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) of the like 4 THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C.No.48638/2019 (Ajeet Kumar Jain Vs. State of M.P.) amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Authority.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by applicant:-
1. Applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. Applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the case may be;
3. Applicant will not indulge in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. Applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. Applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. Applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
Certified copy as per rules.
(S.A. Dharmadhikari) Judge Pawar/-
ASHISH PAWAR 2019.12.02 16:45:31 +05'30'