Madhya Pradesh High Court
Poonamchand Jaiswal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 14 July, 2021
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
-1- MCRC No.16822/2021
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
BENCH AT INDORE
MCRC NO.16822/2021
Poonamchand Jaiswal s/o Kailash Jaiswal vs. State of M.P
14.07.2021: (INDORE):
Shri Shantanu Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Prateek Patwardhan, learned PL for the State. Heard through video conferencing.
This is second repeat application filed u/s 439 Cr.p.C seeking bail in connection with Crime No.284/2020 registered at police station Kothwali, district Dhar for the offence u/s 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC & u/s 6(1) of the M.P Jishepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000 and u/s 3, 4, 5 & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The first application was dismissed as withdrawn on 3.3.21. Thereafter, the charge sheet has been filed and trial has begun against the applicant.
As per prosecution story Lakhan Jaiswal, Dharmendra, Toofan and the present applicant have formed a company called Gracious Colonizer India Ltd. with the Registrar of Companies and got registered a society in the name of M/s Gracious Multistate Agro Cooperative Society Ltd. The company has appointed various agents and received the amount from them for investment in the company and purchasing the land. The company has also invited investments from various other persons. When the aforesaid amount was not returned number of persons have lodged an FIR against the company and its Directors. The present applicant has been made accused by virtue of Directorship in the company.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the company was formed in the year 2013 and at that time the applicant was only 23 years of age. Since he happens to be a relative of Lakhan Jaiswal, therefore, he has been made as a sleeping Director in the company. He has only 10% of the share in the company. He had no active involvement in the day to day functioning of the company which is evident from the memo u/s 27. The remaining Directors Lakhan, -2- MCRC No.16822/2021 Dharmendra and Toofan used to run the company. They have invested the aforesaid amount in various properties. Not a single property is registered in the name of the present applicant. He has filed the bank account statement also that he has not received any amount from the investments. His custodial interrogation is not required because charge sheet has been filed and trial has begun. He is a permanent resident of Sehore, therefore, there is no question of his absconding. The police is unable to arrest the remaining 2 accused, therefore, the applicant cannot be kept in custody for indefinite period. The main accused Lakhan is in jail and his bail application has been rejected. In such circumstances, prays for bail of the applicant.
Shri Patwardhan opposes the bail application by submitting that the applicant has been made accused because he is one of the Directors of the company, however, in the 161 statement of the complainant he has not been specifically named. He has read out the memo u/s 27 also in which he has alleged that all the amount has been invested by Lakhan, Dharmendra and Toofan.
Looking to the limited role of the applicant, further custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. There is no question of tampering of evidence as the entire documents have already been seized. Accordingly, application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under section 437(3) Cr.P.C.
Before releasing the applicant from the custody the jail authorities are directed to medically examine him in order to rule out the possibility of COVID-19 infections and shall comply with the direction given by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Writ Petition No. 1/2020.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
hk/ JUDGE
Digitally signed by HARI KUMAR
C G NAIR
Date: 2021.07.14 16:57:10 +05'30'