Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Khalid Qureshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 December, 2020

Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey

Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey

                                                                       1                            MCRC-44325-2020
                                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                        MCRC-44325-2020
                                                      (KHALID QURESHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


                                      Jabalpur, Dated : 02-12-2020
                                            Heard through Video Conferencing.

                                            Shri Ankit Saxena, Advocate for the applicant.
                                            Shri Amit Pandey, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is the Firs t bail application filed under section 439 Cr.P.C.

Applicant Khalid Qureshi was arrested on 25.09.2020 in Crime No.455/2020 registered at Police Station Kohefiza, District Bhopal for the offence punishable under Section 489-A, 489-B, 489-C of IPC.

As per prosecution case, on 18.07.2020 co-accused Mukesh Yadav went to English Liquor shop located at Lalghati, Bhopal and tried to circulate counterfeit note of Rs.100/-. At that point of time, Nitin Ahirwar, Sub- Inspector, Police Station Kohefiza who was on patrolling, reached there and arrested co-accused Mukesh Yadav and seized 6 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- total Rs.600/- from his possession. On interrogation, co-accused Mukesh Yadav informed the police that the said notes were given to him by co-accused Habib who is the friend of his employer Sanjay Singh Bundela and he also informed the police that co-accused Habib and Sanjay Singh Bundela are sitting in a Scorpio jeep bearing registration No.MP-11-CC-1598. On that Nitin Ahirwar, Sub-Inspector along with other members of the police force went to the spot where he found that one Scorpio jeep bearing registration No.MP-11-CC-1598 was parked at Lalghati near Petrol Pump under the bridge. On seeing the police, one person who was sitting on the driver seat of the jeep ( later identified as co-accused Habib) fled away from the spot. He arrested co-accused Sanjay Singh Bundela who was also sitting in that vehicle. On searching co-accused Sanjay Singh Bundela, counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- worth Rs.65,000/- were found, which were kept Signature Not Verified SAN by Sanjay Singh in his vest’s pocket. On interrogation, co-accused Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2020.12.03 10:57:31 IST 2 MCRC-44325-2020 Sanjay Singh Bundela informed the police that co-accused Habib had given those currency notes to him in lieu of Rs.32,000/-. Police registered Crime No.455/2020 for the offence punishable under Section 489-A, 489-B, 489-C of IPC at Police Station Kohefiza and investigated the matter. During the investigation, it was found that co-accused Sandeep, Ankit @ Ketan, Ayush and Tabrez used to prepare counterfeit currency notes in the house of Tabrez and they gave counterfeit currency notes to accused Habib. On that police also arrested co-accused Ankit @ Ketan and seized 60 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- total Rs.6,000/- from his possession and also seized one colour printer and other instruments used in preparing counterfeit note from the house of co-accused Ankit @ Ketan and co-accused Ayush and also seized 25 counterfeit notes of Rs.100/- total Rs.2,500/- from the possession of co-accused Ayush Piyani, seized 38 counterfeit notes of Rs.100/- total Rs.3,800/- from the possession of co-accused Sandeep Shakya, seized 53 counterfeit notes of Rs.100/- total Rs.5,300/- from the possession of co-accused Tabrej Khan and arrested them. During the investigation, it was also found that applicant Khalid Qureshi was also involved in the crime. He introduced co-accused Habib to co-accused Tabrez.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the offence. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is no direct evidence on record to show that the applicant was involved in preparing or circulating counterfeit currency notes. Police only on the basis of a memorandum of co-accused implicated the applicant in the crime. The charge sheet has been filed. The applicant has been in custody since 25.09.2020 and the conclusion of the trial will take time, hence prayed for the release of the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and submitted that sufficient evidence is available on record to connect the Signature Not Verified SAN applicant with the offence in question. So, he should not be released on bail.

3 MCRC-44325-2020 Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant and the fact that nothing has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. There is no direct evidence on record to show that the applicant was involved in preparing or circulating counterfeit currency notes. Police only on the basis of a memorandum of co- accused implicated the applicant in the crime. The charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is in custody since 25.09.2020 and the conclusion of the trial will take time, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned C.J.M/trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.

This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following conditions by the applicant :-

1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him;

2. The applicant will cooperate in the trial;

3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;

4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;

5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and

6. The applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court.

C.C. on payment of usual charges.

4 MCRC-44325-2020 (RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE (ra) Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by RANJEET AHIRWAL Date: 2020.12.03 10:57:31 IST