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 8, Cited by 0]

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Mohammad Anwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 September, 2019

                                                      1                          MCRC-37763-2019
                             The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                       MCRC-37763-2019
                                    (MOHAMMAD ANWAR Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)


                     Jabalpur, Dated : 26-09-2019
                           Shri Pushpendra Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant.

                           Shri B.S. Thakur, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Case diary is available.

This is second application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. First application MCrC No.32144/2019 has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 19.08.2019.

The applicant has been arrested on 15.07.2019 in connection with Crime No.36/2019 registered by Police Station Cyber Cell, Bhopal, District Bhopal for offence punishable under Sections 420, 419/34, 468 and 471 of IPC and Section 66 D of Information Technology Act.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that the applicant has been made accused only on the basis of memorandum of co-accused and his own memorandum also, which is not admissible in evidence. The applicant has never approach to induce of cheat to the complainant and merely because he is the friend of main accused, made accused in the offence. The only role to the applicant is that he created the website for the main accused by whom the main accused cheated the complainant and other persons. The applicant is 75% handicapped person for which he has filed copy of certificate annexed herewith as Annexure A/2. The FIR is of withdrawal of the money against the unknown persons, but there is no recovery of money done from the applicant and also no identification parade has been conduced by the police. The applicant is in jail since 15.07.2019. Trial will take a long time to conclude. The applicant is permanent resident of the district and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case. On these grounds prayer is made to Digitally signed by KAFEEL AHMED ANSARI Date: 26/09/2019 22:33:47 2 MCRC-37763-2019 enlarge the applicant on bail. Counsel has also placed reliance on the decision in Sunil Kumar Panda vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in AIR 2018 SC (Supp) 287 in which the applicant was enlarged on bail under section 420/34 of IPC while he was under custody since July 2017. Counsel has also filed an order of this Court dated 05.07.2019 passed in M.Cr.C. No.17556/2019 in which the applicant was enlarged on bail on a condition of depositing 1/3rd of the defalcated amount Rs.2,33,000/- in the trial Court.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the application and prayed for its rejection on the ground that in view of serious allegations made against the present applicant, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused entire material available on record including the case diary.

Keeping in view the nature of allegations and other facts and circumstances of the case and the case law cited above by the counsel for the applicant, it is apparent that the fact of the present case is entirely different to the above cited cases as in the present matter, the applicant is under custody only since 15.07.2019 and against him offences under sections 420, 419/34, 468 and 471 of IPC & Section 66-D of Information Technology Act has been registered and the total amount cheated by the present applicant and other co- accused in the present case is approximately around Rs.15,32,200/-, therefore, the above cited case is of no help to the present applicant. Apart from that particularly allegation against the applicant is also that he has created 24 fake websites for cheating innocent persons. Looking to the entire fact and involving cyber crime, but without commenting anything on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. Hence, this repeat application is hereby dismissed.

(AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE kafeel Digitally signed by KAFEEL AHMED ANSARI Date: 26/09/2019 22:33:47 3 MCRC-37763-2019 Digitally signed by KAFEEL AHMED ANSARI Date: 26/09/2019 22:33:47