Chattisgarh High Court
Shailendra Massey vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 February, 2022
Author: Parth Prateem Sahu
Bench: Parth Prateem Sahu
1
(Proceedings through video conferencing)
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 10307 of 2021
• Mohammad Arif S/o Shri Babu Khan, Aged About 35 Years R/o
Shanti Nagar, Agwanpur, P.S. Civil Line, District- Moradabad (UP).
---- Applicant (In jail)
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S.
Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)
---- Non-applicant
&
MCRC No.406 of 2022
• Shailendra Massey S/o Late Manohar Massey, aged about 48 years
R/o Phase Fix Star Kanth Road, P.S. Kanth, District Muradabad
(U.P.)
Permanent resident of D.A.-10, Arvila (Aravali) Vihar, Alwar P.S.
Alwar, District Alwar (Rajasthan).
Presently Residing At H.No.328-A, Noorwala Stand, Sector-13-17,
Panipat (HR) 132103.
---- Applicant (In jail)
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer P.S. Sarkanda,
Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG).
---- Non-applicant
M.Cr.C. No.10307/2021
For Applicant : Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate
For Non-applicant : Mr. G.I. Sharan, Govt. Advocate
&
M.Cr.C. No.406/2022
For Applicant : Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, Sr. Advocate
assisted by Mr. Anish Tiwari, Mr. Atul
Kesharwani & Mr. Mohit Kumar,
Advocates
For Non-applicant : Mr. G.I. Sharan, Govt. Advocate
2
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
9.2.2022
1.As above two bail applications arise out of same crime number, they are heard together and decided by this common order.
2. These are second applications on behalf of both applicants under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail as applicants are in custody since 26.9.2021 in connection with Crime No.1190/21 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, Bilaspur (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 365, 364, 294, 323, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Previous bail applications of both applicants bearing M.Cr.C. Nos.9110/2021 & 8180/2021 were dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive after filing of charge sheet.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for both applicants that police after conclusion of investigation has submitted charge sheet, hence this second bail application.
5. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 19.9.2021 Pradeep Agrawal, owner of Sky Hospital, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, gave mobile call to Rakesh Garg, who is working as Manager in Sky Hospital, and asked him to hand over his cheque book to the person he is sending. After handing over cheque book, when Rakesh Garg contacted Pradeep Agrawal on his mobile, he told him that his life is in danger. Rakesh Garg lodged missing report of Pradeep Agrawal in concerned police station based upon which aforementioned crime is registered. During course 3 of investigation, police arrested applicants on 24.9.2021 from Muradabad (Uttar Pradesh). Pradeep Agrawal was recovered from airport at Raipur on 21.9.2021 at 8:30 p.m.
6. Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, learned Senior Counsel for applicant Shailendra Massey would submit that absolutely false and baseless allegations are levelled against applicant. Applicant is a highly qualified doctor having degree of Master in Medicine (MD) and MRCP degree from United Kingdom. Pradeep Agrawal engaged applicant in his hospital on monthly salary of Rs.6,00,000/-. Looking to hike in income of hospital during Covid-10 pandemic, applicant asked Pradeep Agrawal to make him partner in his hospital business and as per oral agreement, Pradeep Agrawal agreed to make applicant partner of 25%. However, subsequently, Pradeep Agrawal denied to share profit with applicant and even not paid monthly salary. When applicant pressurized Pradeep Agrawal for payment, he gave cheque of Rs.6,00,000/- to applicant but when said cheque was deposited for encashment, it was dishonoured. Applicant sent legal notice through his counsel to Pradeep Agrawal of filing case against him in default, then he agreed to amicably settle the dispute. When applicant and co-accused Mohd. Arif came to Bilaspur, Pradeep Agrawal said that he will make payment of amount only after withdrawal of case filed against him by applicant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 before the jurisdictional Court at Muradabad. It is only for this reason, Pradeep Agrawal accompanied applicant to Delhi and 4 from there to Muradabad where he executed an agreement before the Notary Public for payment of Rs.1,65,00,000/-, which is due to applicant Shailendra Massey. He also handed number of cheques, total of which amounting to Rs.1,65,00,000/-. He submits that after settlement of issue, Pradeep Agrawal came back to Raipur via flight and till reaching of Raipur he did not make any allegation or complaint before police authority at Muradabad / Delhi or CRPF personnel present at airport in Delhi and Raipur. Story narrated is concocted and highly improbable. He also submits that missing report is lodged on 19.9.2021 and on 20.9.2021 police sought permission from higher police officials for constituting a team for investigation and search of Pradeep Agrawal in Uttar Pradesh. However, there is no mention in entire charge sheet as to how police came to know that Pradeep Agrawal or accused persons are in Uttar Pradesh. Hence, it is prima facie apparent that applicant is implicated in aforementioned crime in a planned manner. He also pointed out that initially in arrest memo date of arrest of applicant was mentioned as 21.9.2021, but at the time of filing of charge sheet it was changed to 24.9.2021 only to deprive applicant from his right to get default bail. Applicant is a doctor by profession, he is in jail since 26.9.2021; police after completion of investigation has already filed charge sheet; custodial interrogation of applicant is not required; looking to profession of applicant there is no apprehension of his fleeing away. Hence, applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. 5
7. Adopting arguments advanced by learned Senior Counsel for applicant in M.Cr.C. No.406/2022, Mr. Syed Majid Ali, learned counsel for applicant Mohammed Arif added that applicant is a doctor by profession, he was working as Resident Medical Officer in Sky Hospital, Bilaspur, which is run and owned by Pradeep Agrawal. Prior to date of alleged incident, applicant made complaint (Annexure A-3) to the State as also Central authorities regarding irregularities committed in Sky Hospital during Covid-19 pandemic by raising excessive bills towards medicines and injections administered to Covid-19 patients and cheated them. After coming to know that applicant has submitted complaint, Pradeep Agrawal, owner of hospital, tried to reconcile dispute and when applicant refused to accept proposal, he was removed from employment. Applicant is in jail since 26.9.2021, hence he may be enlarged on regular bail.
8. On the other hand, Mr. G.I. Sharan, learned counsel for the State opposes submissions of learned counsel for both applicants and submits that applicants along with other co- accused persons have committed crime of serious nature. Applicant came to Bilaspur from Muradabad (UP), called Pradeep Agrawal to a particular place and from there they abducted/kidnapped him under threat of life. Applicants and other co-accused persons asked him to bring his cheque book, as appearing in missing report lodged by Rakesh Garg, Manager of Sky Hospital, owned and run by Pradeep Agrawal. He also submits that while lodging missing report, said 6 Rakesh Garg has specifically stated that when he made call on mobile phone of Pradeep Agrawal, he told him that his life is in danger. Pradeep Agrawal was recovered from the airport at Raipur on 21.9.2021 at 8:30 p.m. Thereafter he was sent for medical examination and the doctor who examined him noticed injuries on his person. Under the threat of life, accused persons got executed an agreement by Pradeep Agrawal and also obtained some cheques, which were recovered from possession of applicant Shailendra Massey. Applicant Shailendra Massey in memorandum statement admitted commission of crime by him and co-accused persons, hence they are not entitled to be enlarged on regular bail.
On putting specific question with regard to source of information regarding presence of abducted/kidnapped person or accused persons in Uttar Pradesh, after minutely going through case diary learned State Counsel submits that at present no such material indicating source of information is available in case diary.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
10. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations levelled against applicants; undisputed fact that both applicants are doctor by profession; prior to date of incident they were engaged by Pradeep Agrawal in Sky Hospital, Bilaspur; submissions made by learned counsel for both sides that missing report was lodged on 19.9.2021, police submitted application before higher police officials for granting 7 permission to constitute a team for investigation in Uttar Pradesh on 20.9.2021; the fact that there is no mention in case diary about source of information regarding presence of kidnapped person in Uttar Pradesh; applicants are in jail since 26.9.2021; no further custodial interrogation of applicants is required; without commenting anything on merits of case, I find present to be a fit case where applicants can be enlarged on regular bail.
11. Accordingly, bail applications (M.Cr.C. Nos.10307/2021 & 406/2022) are allowed and it is directed that applicants- Mohammad Arif & Shailendra Massey shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety in like sum to satisfaction of trial Court concerned on conditions that;
• they shall appear before trial Court concerned regularly on each and every date unless exempted from appearance. • they shall not, in any manner, tamper with prosecution witnesses.
• if they are found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/-