Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manoj Nagar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 28 July, 2021
Author: Sujoy Paul
Bench: Sujoy Paul
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh, Bench At Indore
M.Cr.C No.25899/2021
(Manoj Nagar Vs. State of MP) 1
INDORE; DATED - 28/07/2021
Heard through video conferencing.
Shri Amit Bhatia, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Aditya Garg, learned counsel for the respondent/State.
With the consent, heard finally.
ORDER
This is first application filed under section 439 of the Cr.P.C arising out of Crime No.249/2021 under section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the IPC registered at Police Station - Khajrana, Indore.
2) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that complainant Ajay Gupta preferred a complaint stating that a sale deed was executed in the year 2001 regarding a plot in Nyay Nagar Extension. However, he did not get the possession. The charge-sheet has been filed. There is no iota of legal evidence against the applicant. Although applicant is named in the FIR, there exists nothing which connects the applicant with commission of crime. The Court below has granted bail to co-accused Nitin Gupta in similar crime number. There is delay of about 20 years in lodging the FIR. Thus, applicant may be enlarged on bail.
3) The prayer is opposed by Shri Garg by contending the modus operandi of present applicant and persons/office bearer of society is already demonstrated in the connected matter MCRC No.26558/2021 (Nitin vs. State of MP), and in the said case Shri Garg argued that :-
"4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposing the bail application submits that no doubt in crime no.248/2021, the applicant Nitin got bail. The allegations in crime no.248/2021 and in the present case arising out of crime no.249/2021 are almost similar. However, a huge colony namely 'Nyay Nagar Extension' is artificially divided into two colonies namely 'Radhe Vihar Colony' and 'Saraswati Colony'. There was no documentary basis for formation of these two colonies. There exists no permission by any statutory authority for formation of these two colonies, which were illegally created by The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh, Bench At Indore M.Cr.C No.25899/2021 (Manoj Nagar Vs. State of MP) 2 diverting the land of an authorised colony namely 'Nyay Nagar Extension'.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that in a systematic manner, the applicant connived with the land mafia and co-accused persons thereby land of 'Nyay Nagar Extension' was shown as land of aforesaid two colonies. The said land was sold to new persons by way of notarized documents. Resultantly, the actual owners in whose favour the sale deeds were executed were deprived. By using this modus operandi, a sizable number of complainants were deprived to enjoy the fruits of their lands for which they have registered sale deeds in their favour."
4) In addition, it is urged by Govt. counsel that during the investigation, sizable number of complainants came forward and many of them have taken name of present applicant. Hence, Section 386, 387 and 388 of IPC were subsequently added. More than 10 complainants have taken name of present applicant. Investigation is going on. Ajay Gupta is the complainant. Hence, applicant does not deserve bail at this stage.
5) This Court in the connected case of Nitin (supra) opined as under:-
"9. The gist of complaints is that Nyay Nagar Extension was a valid colony which was illegally bifurcated into two illegal colonies namely, Radhe Vihar Colony and Sarswati Colony. The argument of counsel for State was not controverted to the extent he stated about creation of two illegal colonies aforesaid which do not have any permission from any statutory authority for such creation. The complaints on which heavy reliance is placed by learned Senior counsel do not contain any such averment that Nyay Nagar Extension itself is diverted into two illegal separate colonies. The complaints were not preferred by the present applicant. If present applicant was Vice Chairman of the Nayay Vibhag Karmachari Grih Nirman Sahakari Sanstha, it was incumbent upon the society and the applicant to take serious objection The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh, Bench At Indore M.Cr.C No.25899/2021 (Manoj Nagar Vs. State of MP) 3 regarding formation of two illegal societies and selling the plots illegally by way of notarized agreements.
10. It appears that land grabbing with the aid of muscleman became order of the day at least at Indore. Sizable number of litigation travelling to this Court in this regard at least suggest that. The actual land owner in whose favour there exists a registered sale deed is either dispossessed or not granted the possession of the land with the aid of land mafia. Thereafter with the aid of muscleman and with the connivance of the office bearers of the society, land is being sold to a third person. Unfortunately, we are witnessing a sizable number of such cases. The nexus of muscleman and key persons involved in such deal is so deep-rooted that normally a common man doesn't dare to prefer a named complaint.
11. The criminal record of present applicant (Nitin) is as under:-
Ø Fkkuk vijk/k /kkjk
- Øekad
1 [ktjkuk 1010@19 420] Hkknfo
2 [ktjkuk 1011@19 420 406 Hkhnfo
3 [ktjkuk 1240@21 420 467 468 120 ch
4 [ktjkuk 14@20 420 467 468 120 ch
5 [ktjkuk 248@21 420] 467] 468] 471]
120 ch Hkknoh
6 [ktjkuk 249@21 420] 467] 468] 471]
120 ch Hkknoh
12. The learned govt. counsel pointed out that the Court below in another crime number granted bail to the applicant on a wrong assumption that complaints regarding encroachment were preferred by the applicant, whereas the said complaints were not preferred by present applicant. The complaints aforesaid do not contain any averment regarding formation of two illegal colonies by giving them two different names in an unauthorized manner. It is also pointed out that investigation in the present crime is still going on. Everyday the aggrieved persons are coming forward and preferring complaints regarding the misdeed of present applicant and the muscleman.
13. Pertinently, the application preferred under Section 307(5) of Municipal Corporation Act preferred by applicant also does not reflect that he raised objection The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh, Bench At Indore M.Cr.C No.25899/2021 (Manoj Nagar Vs. State of MP) 4 regarding formation of two illegal colonies. The Nyay Nagar Extension must be having hundreds of plots which is evident from applicant's own application preferred under Section 307 of Municipal Corporation Act. If these sizable number of plots were shown in other colony, the minimum expectation was that the Cooperative Society of applicant's will lodge complaint with accuracy and precision before the competent authority. No such complaint is brought to the notice of this Court.
14. The complaints are being preferred on regular basis by the persons, who have been deprived from the fruits of registered sale deed in Nyay Nagar Extension.
15. During the course of hearing, Shri Aditya Garg, learned Govt. Advocate pointed out that since complaints are of almost similar and relating to same colony, the police are investigating the matter by treating it to be in the crime numbers which are already registered and not registering every complaint as a different crime number.
16. In view of aforesaid, it is clear that the investigation will take time. Investigation in the instant case is still not over. Considering these aspects, in the opinion of this Court, it is not a fit case for granting bail to the applicant at this stage. Applicant can renew his application after filing of challan against him and after examination of complainant by the Court below."
6) As per prosecution story, applicant is one of the muscleman with whose aid the sizable number of plots were sold to unauthorized persons in unauthorized colonies and actual owners were deprived and threatened. In a case of this nature, where investigation was going on, it is not safe to grant bail to the applicant keeping in view the criminal record of the applicant, which reads as under:-
- Fkkuk vijk/k Øekad /kkjk
1 [ktjkuk 65@2016 420] 467] 468] 471] 120 ch
2 [ktjkuk 66@2016 420] 467] 468] 471] 120 ch
3 [ktjkuk 976@2019 420] 467] 468] 471] 120 ch
4 [ktjkuk 1270@2020 420] 467] 468] 471] 120 ch
5 [ktjkuk 249@2021 420] 467] 468] 471] 120 ch
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh, Bench At Indore M.Cr.C No.25899/2021 (Manoj Nagar Vs. State of MP) 5
7) In this view of the matter, the bail application is rejected by reserving liberty to the applicant to renew it after challan is filed and complainant Ajay Gupta is examined by Court below.
(Sujoy Paul) Judge soumya Digitally signed by SOUMYA RANJAN DALAI Date: 2021.07.29 14:52:14 +05'30'