Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ajay Soni vs Girdharilal on 6 April, 2016
MCRC No. 3188/2016
1
(Ajay Soni vs. Girdharilal & Anr.)
06.04.2016
Shri Shishir Saxena, learned counsel for the
applicant/accused.
Shri Rishikesh Bohare, learned counsel for the
respondent No.2/complainant.
This is first bail application filed by the applicant/accused under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for anticipatory bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with Private Complaint No. 100/2016 pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guna for offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 471 of IPC.
Learned counsel for the applicant/accused submits that as per the contents of the criminal complaint filed by the respondent No.2 no offence is made out in this case as alleged by the complainant because no fake and forged sale deed or any other document was executed by the applicant in favour of Mahavir Jain. The contents of the complaint reveal that it is a case of boundary dispute of the plots between both the parties in favour of whom sale deeds were executed by the power of attorney holder. One of them was executed on 02.09.2013 by power of attorney holder Gopal Shivhare on behalf of Nathulal in favour of Govardhanlal S/o Kanhaiya Lal Agrawal who was the father of the complainant and another sale deed of the part of the same survey number was executed on 23.12.1993 by the same power of attorney holder Gopal Shivhare in favour of Neeraj Verma but the boundaries mentioned in both the sale deeds are overlapping with each other because of that MCRC No. 3188/2016 2 the dispute arose between the parties purchasing the said plots but the applicant/accused neither cheated the complainant in any manner nor did he execute any fake and forged document in favour of the purchaser. Therefore, the cognizance taken by the learned trial court for the aforesaid offences are totally contrary to law, hence, the applicant/accused be granted bail.
Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 opposing the submissions made on behalf of the applicant/accused submits that the application filed by the applicant/accused be dismissed as the alleged offences are serious in nature because the applicant/accused cheated the complainant as stated in the complaint.
Heard the arguments of both the parties.
On perusal of the contents of the complaint, the submissions made on behalf of the applicant/accused appear to be sound, hence the application is allowed. It is ordered that the applicant/accused shall appear before the trial court within 15 days from today, failing which this order shall have no effect and if he furnishes surety bond and personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) for his regular appearance before the court, he be released on bail.
Certified copy as per rules.
(M.K. Mudgal)
(alok) Judge