Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Manoj Singh Sengar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 May, 2022

Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal

Bench: Deepak Kumar Agarwal

                                      1
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT GWALIOR
                                BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
                               ON THE 10th OF MAY, 2022

                MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 20864 of 2022

         Between:-
         MANOJ SINGH SENGAR S/O JAYRAM SINGH
         SENGAR   ,  AGED  ABOUT   45 YEARS,
         OCCUPATION: PVT. SERVICE KAILADEVI
         COLONY GOLA KA MANDIR (MADHYA
         PRADESH)

                                                              .....PETITIONER
         (BY SHRI RAHUL CHAUHAN-ADVOCATE)

         AND

         THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
         POLICE   STATION   P.S. MAHARAJPURA
         (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                           .....RESPONDENTS
         (BY SHRI R.K.AWASTHY-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
         SHRI R.K.JOHSI-ADVOCATE FOR THE COMPLAINANT )

      This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
                                       ORDER

This is first bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 11.04.2022 in connection with Crime No. 602/2021 registered at Police Station Maharajpura, District Gwalior for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of IPC.

In brief prosecution case is that on 15.9.2021 complainant Gajraj Singh lodged a computerized complaint with S.P. Gwalior that he is having a plot 102, area 800 sqft. at Adityapuram, Bhind road which he purchased from 2 Brahmnadevi Bhadoria by registered sale deed dated 7.8.2013. Applicant- accused Manoj Singh and co-accused Brajendra Singh very well knowing that the aforesaid plot is in the ownership of complainant Gajraj Singh fabricated the sale deed with his counterfeit signature and voter ID card and after misusing the photo of complainant in favour of Brijendra Singh. Thereafter,accused Birjendra Singh sold the aforesaid plot to accused Netrapal Singh and his wife Rana Singh. Rana Singh gave a public notice in Dainik Bhaskar on 13.3.2015 after inviting objection of purchase of the aforesaid plot. Complainant Gajraj Singh lodged an objection on 19.3.2015 to Rana Singh through his Advocate Y.P.Singh, despite this on 9.11.2015 accused Netrapal and Rana Singh Bhadoria purchased the aforesaid plot. By way of this act applicant-accused Manoj, Brijendra, Netrapal and Rana Singh cheated him.

From the side of applicant-accused Netrapal Singh enquiry conducted by CSP, Maharajpura on the application of complainant Gajtraj Singh has been filed on 4.4.2015. As per enquiry report, complainant Gajraj Singh executed the sale deed in favour of accused Brijendra Singh on 23.1.2015 at Sub Registrar Office which has been entered in serial No.1538 and during registration complainant Gajraj Singh also filed and affidavit to this effect that he and Brijendra Singh knows each and every purchaser. In support of enquiry report, report of Sub Registrar has also been annexed.

From the side of complainant it was argued that applicant-accused Manoj, Brijendra,Netrapal and Rana very well knowing that disputed plot is in the ownership of Gajraj Singh and they fabricated the document and executed forged sale deed. On the basis of that FIR has been registered.

From the side applicant-accused it was also argued that the registry has been executed on 13.1.2015 and complaint has been filed after six years on 3 3.7.2021. On the application no enquiry was conducted by the police, but after two months keeping pending application, aforesaid offence has been registered. Hence, prayed for grant of bail.

Learned counsel for the State as well as counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the application and prayed for its rejection.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case but without commenting upon the merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is hereby directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned for his regular appearance before the Court concerned on the dates fixed by the Court concerned.

He will present during trial before the trial Court on each and every date.

Certified copy as per rules.

(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE vv VALSALA VASUDEVAN 2022.05.10 10:03:11 +05'30'