Madhya Pradesh High Court
Satyam Agrawal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 January, 2022
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
M.Cr.C. No.14706/2021
(Satyam Agrawal Vs. State of M.P. )
1
Jabalpur, Dated : 04 / 01 / 2022
Shri Sanjay Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Alok Gupta, learned P.L. for the respondent-State.
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is the first bail application filed by the applicant Satyam Agrawal under Section 438 of CrPC for grant of anticipatory bail.
The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 102/2020 registered at P.S. Ishanagar, Distt. Chhatarpur (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 120-B of IPC and Section 76 of the Chit fund Act,1982.
As per prosecution case, the applicant and co-accused person, who were the Chairman and Agents of Pincon Group of Company, collected huge amount from innocent persons assuring them to double their money within a stipulated period. However, they did not pay the money even after the maturity periods. On the other hand, they closed down the company Office and embezzled the huge amount of innocent people. Thus, they cheated innocent people. The specific allegation against the applicant is that he is the agent of the company and he induced the complainant/other innocent people to deposit the money with the company.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that though the name of the applicant is mentioned in the FIR and it is mentioned that applicant is the agent of Pincon Group of Company but in the case diary statement of prosecution witnesses recorded by the investigation officer during investigation name of the applicant is not mentioned. There is no document on record to show that the THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.14706/2021 (Satyam Agrawal Vs. State of M.P. ) 2 applicant was the agent of the company or induced any person to deposit money with the said company or he collected any amount from innocent investors. Applicant has no criminal past. Charge sheet has been filed. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and trial. Custodial interrogation is not required in the matter. In the event of arrest, his reputation will be ruined. Under these circumstances, applicant prays for bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer and submitted that the applicants and other accused persons played fraud upon innocent investors and deprived them of their hard earned money. The applicant is the agent of the company. The offence under Section 6 of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000 is also made out against the applicant. According to Section 14 of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000 ( further referred to as "the Act" ) anticipatory bail is barred. So he should not be released on anticipatory bail.
The bar under Section 14 of the M.P. Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000, only applies where from the charge sheet prima facie offence under the act is made out against the applicant. While in this case there is no legal evidence on record to show that the applicant was the employee or agent of the company or he induced any person to deposit money with the said company or he collected any amount from innocent investors. Though the name of the applicant is mentioned in the FIR but in the case diary statements of prosecution witnesses it is not mentioned that the applicant was involved in the crime. So from the charge sheet, prima facie offence under the act is not made out against the applicant. He has no criminal past. So looking to the THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No.14706/2021 (Satyam Agrawal Vs. State of M.P. ) 3 facts and circumstances of the case, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of surrendering by the applicant before trial Court within 15 days from today in connection with the aforesaid crime the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty thousand only) with separate surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the investigation/trial, as the 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court/Investigating Officer, as the case may be.
C.C. as per rules.
(Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
sarathe Judge
Digitally signed
by NAVEEN
KUMAR SARATHE
Date: 2022.01.05
10:12:30 +05'30'