Madhya Pradesh High Court
Prem Chand Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 March, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Paliwal
1
I N T H E H I G H C O U RT O F M A D H YA P R A D E S H
AT J A B A L P U R
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56969 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
PREM CHAND SINGH, S/O SHRI LATE BILAT
SINGH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION -
UNEMPLOYED, R/O 2131, BISHOP HOUSE, NAPIER
TOWN, J ABALPUR, DISTRICT JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI ANIL KHARE - SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI HARJ AS SINGH
CHHABRA - ADVOCATE )
AND
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
ECONOMIC OFFENCE WING J ABALPUR UNIT,
DISTRICT J ABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI PRASHANT SINGH - ADVOCATE GENERAL WITH SHRI
MADHUR SHUKLA - ADVOCATE)
..........................................................................................
Reserved on : 06.02.2024
Pronounced on : 06.03.2024
This application having been heard and reserved for orders, coming
on for pronouncement this day, the court passed the following:
ORDER
This is the first application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. relating to FIR No.35/2023 dated 03.08.2023, registered at Police Station - Economic Offences Wing, Jabalpur Unit, District - Jabalpur (MP) for commission of the offences punishable under Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM 2 Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC. Applicant apprehending his arrest in connection with the aforesaid offences has knocked the portal of this Court for grant of anticipatory bail.
2. As per prosecution story, in the course of investigation of some offence, it came to the knowledge of the Investigation Officer that P.C.Singh got executed a lease deed of 4000 Sq.ft. plot comprising of land survey numbers Nos.15/1, 15/8, 15/9, 15/10 and 10/1 of Civil Station, Block No.4, Swami Dayanand Saraswati Ward, North Civil Line, Jabalpur on 07.06.2019 in his favour by one Prem Masih who was the power of attorney holder of United Church of Northern India Trust Association (UCNITA). It is alleged that when sale deed of leased land was executed in favour of P.C.Singh (present applicant) by Prem Masih, P.C. Singh was the Chairman of UCNITA. It is stated that long back in the year 1919-1920, Plot No.15 comprising area 65,441 acre was leased out to foreign Cristian Missionary Society of Cincinnati Of Ohio, USA. It is alleged that aforesaid lease was renewed in the year 1970 and its validity period had expired on 31.03.1999. It is alleged that after expiry of lease, transfer deed was executed on 07.06.2019. As such, P.C.Singh (present applicant) and Prem Masih by preparing and executing documents have caused wrongful loss of worth Rs. 1,48,69,600/- to the State Government. Matter is still under investigation.
3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant has submitted that applicant has not committed any offence. He is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in the case. He is 60 years old man. It is submitted that earlier an FIR with regard to one offence was registered against the applicant and in that case, the matter of the present case was Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM 3 also taken into consideration by the Investigation Agency; but it, instead of filing supplementary charge-sheet, registered the second FIR, while registration of second FIR about a document which was already before Investigation Agency is not permitted. Learned counsel for the applicant has referred order dated 04.08.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No.29526 of 2023 (Prem Chand Singh Vs. Directorate of Enforcement) and has submitted in that case, a reference has been made about the document of this case also, therefore, the Investigation Agency was required not to register second FIR. He has placed reliance on Hon'ble the Apex Court Constitutional Bench decision in the case of Sushila Aggar wal and Other s Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another ; (2020) 5 SCC 1. He has particularly relied upon the paragraphs 62, 63, 75, 85.2, 85.7 and 95.8 of the judgment.
4. It is also the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that the documents which had been made subject matter of the case could have been recovered in the earlier case only. Applicant/accused has been maliciously implicated in the second case. On the aforesaid pretext, it is prayed that applicant may be released on anticipatory bail.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate General has submitted that first FIR was in respect of Crime No.80/2022 and in that case, allegations were with regard to transfer of funds of the institution for religious purposes. It is submitted that FIR of the present case has no connection with the FIR bearing Crime No.80/2022 in which charge- sheet has already been filed. It is further submitted that the land/plot area admeasuring 4000 sq. ft. which has been got transferred by the applicant in his name by issuing power of attorney in favour of Prem Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM 4 Masih was a leased land and lease was issued in favour of M/s United Church of Northern India Trust Association (UCNITA). It being a lease land was a Trust Property. It is contended that sale deed was recovered when search in the applicant's house was conducted. It is submitted by learned Advocate General that Section 165 (7-b) of M.P. Land Revenue Code, 1959 bars the transfer of Government leased property/trust property without prior permission of the Collector.
6. It is submitted by learned Advocate General that applicant is having criminal background of 60 cases in all over the country. As a number of cases have been registered against the applicant and he is having a long criminal background, his custodial interrogation is necessary. It is contended that five notices have already been sent to applicant/accused so far, but he has not turned up to cooperate in the investigation and is on run. It is also his submission that in Economic Offences, particularly in the crime by the white collar offender, a different approach is required to be adopted. It is also his contention that in first FIR, Prem Masih to whom, this Court has released on regular bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., was not an accused. It is a separate case. Custodial interrogation of the applicant in the present case is necessary, therefore, he has prayed for dismissal of anticipatory bail application.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the case diary & material available on record.
8. On perusal of the material available on record, it is apparent that present applicant who at the relevant time was the Chairman of United Church of Northern India Trust Association (UCNITA) executed Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM 5 power of attorney in favour of Prem Masih and later, got a sale deed/lease deed of the land area admeasuring 4000 sq. ft. executed in his favour from Prem Masih on basis of strength of power of attorney. It is undisputed that aforesaid land was given on lease by State to the Foreign Christian Missionary Society of Cincinnati of Ohio, USA, long back in the year 1919-1920. It is alleged that aforesaid lease was renewed in the year 1970 and its validity period had expired on 31.03.1999; but later, it was renewed by the State Government till 31.03.2029. In this case, it is undisputed that Prem Masih (power of attorney) has executed the transfer deed in favour of Prem Chand Singh (present applicant) at a time when lease deed had already expired; but later, it was renewed upto March, 2029.
9. As far as, Prem Chand Singh (present applicant) is concerned, in total 60 cases are registered against him in various police stations of the different States of the country. The particulars of the same are - 01 case in District South West New Delhi (Delhi), 18 case in District Prayagraj (Uttar Pradesh), 02 cases in District Kanpur (U.P.), 01 case in District Jaunpur (U.P.), 08 cases in District Jhansi (U.P.), 01 case in District Lucknow (U.P.), 01 case in District Meerut (U.P.), 01 case in District Jaipur (Rajasthan), 12 cases in District Ajmer (Rajesthan), 02 cases in District Nagpur (Maharashtra), 02 cases in District Jalna (Maharashtra), 03 cases in District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), 01 case in Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh), 01 case in District Chaibasa (Jharkhand), 02 cases in District S.A.S. Nagar (Punjab), 01 case in District Roopnagar City (Punjab), 01 case in District Yamuna Nagar (Haryana), 01 case in District Indore (M.P.) and 01 case in District Jabalpur (M.P.).
Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM 610. The arguments of learned counsel for the applicant, in earlier FIR bearing Crime No.80/2022, a supplementary charge-sheet should have been filed with regard to the present case, has not to be considered at this stage. The matter is still under investigation. Therefore, at this stage, it would not be proper to express any opinion on the point whether a supplementary charge-sheet had to be filed in earlier case with regard to the present case or not and same is no ground to grant anticipatory bail.
11. In the case of Sushila Aggar wal and Other s Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another ; (2020) 5 SCC 1, on which reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the applicant, Hon'ble the Apex Court has made it clear that as to when anticipatory bail may be granted, offences in respect of which anticipatory bail may be granted and the duration for which it may be granted. It has been made clear that a blanket protection cannot be granted by way of anticipatory bail. In this judgment, it has been made clear that anticipatory bail may be granted having regard to all the circumstances, in respect of all offences, unless there is a statutory bar or restriction in respect of the offence(s) concerned. In this judgment, it has also been made clear if there are any specific fact and peculiar feature in regard to any offence, it is open for the Court to impose any appropriate condition. Thus, in Sushila Aggarwal's case (supr a), Hon'ble the Apex Court has clarified the law about grant of anticipatory bail.
12. In the case in hand, it cannot be over-looked that almost 60 cases are registered against the present applicant in various police stations of the different States of the country.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM 713. In State of Gujar at Vs. Mohanlal J itamalji Por wal and Another ; (1987) 2 SCC 364, Hon'ble the Apex Court has held as under:-
"5. ...............Ends of justice are not satisfied only when the accused in a criminal case is acquitted. The Community acting through the State and the Public Prosecutor is also entitled to justice. The cause of the community deserves equal treatment at the hands of the court in the discharge of its judicial functions. The Community or the State is not a persona-non-grata whose cause may be treated with disdain. The entire Community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to book. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the Community. A disregard for the interest of the Community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the Community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the National Economy and National Interest."
14. The case in hand is a case where accused being Chairman of the Trust executed power of attorney in favour of one Prem Masih and thereafter, in his turn got registered a transfer deed of area admeasuring 4000 sq.ft. a valuable land in his own favour. He is the main beneficiary of the offence. The provisions of anticipatory bail are meant for the persons who are first offender and whose custodial interrogation is not necessary or nature of case does not require that they be arrested, but Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM 8 looking to the long criminal background of the applicant/accused, it would not be proper to grant him anticipatory bail.
15. In Neer u Yadav Vs. State of U.P.; (2016) 15 SCC 422, Hon'ble the Apex Court has held as under :-
"11. It is a well settled principle of law that while dealing with an application for grant of bail, it is the duty of the Court to take into consideration certain factors and they basically are; (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in cases of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses for apprehension of threat to the complainant, and (iii) Prima facie satisfaction of the court in support of the charge.
[See Chaman Lal v. State of U.P.; (2004) 7 SCC 525]"
16. Applicant is a white collar offender and various economic offeces are registered against him in different States of the Country, therefore, granting anticipatory bail in such case to a person who has such a long criminal background would be against settled principles of law. In this regard, reliance can be placed on a decision in the case of Y.S. J agan Mohan Reddy Vs. Centr al Bureau of Investigation; (2013) 7 SCC 439, wherein Hon'ble the Apex Court in paragraphs 34 & 35 has held as under:-
"34. Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial health of the country.Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM 9
35. While granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations."
17. In the case in hand, it cannot be over-looked that applicant is having a long criminal background and is not cooperating with the investigation. He has not turned up before the Investigation Agency despite sending of five notices to him. The investigation is at nascent stage, therefore; at this juncture, it cannot be inferred that supplementary charge-sheet with regard to the offence registered earlier against the applicant should have been filed. Thus, having taken into consideration all the facts & circumstances of the case, gravity of offence including the long criminal background of the applicant and the fact that applicant is not cooperating in the investigation and is on run, but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out as provisions of anticipatory bail cannot be extended in favour of a habitual offender.
18. Consequently, this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail filed on behalf of applicant - Prem Chand Singh stands dismissed.
(DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL) JUDGE @shish Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHISH KUMAR JAIN Signing time: 3/6/2024 7:06:38 PM