Madhya Pradesh High Court
Neetu Singh Rajput vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh Thr on 8 September, 2017
1
M.Cr.C.No.9723/2017
(Neetu Singh Rajput Vs. State of M.P.)
08.09.2017
Mr. Rajeev Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Mr. Vivek Bhargava, learned Public Prosecutor for the
respondent/State.
Case diary is available.
This is repeat bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail. First bail application has been dismissed on merits by a detailed order dated 08.08.2017 passed in M.Cr.C.No.9723/2017.
The applicant has been arrested on 01.07.2017 in connection with Crime No.323/2017 registered by Police Station Kotwali, District Vidisha, for offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 120-B and 109 of IPC.
This Court vide order dated 08.08.2017 after considering the allegation and the fact that the investigation is pending has observed as under :
"In the present case, the allegations against the applicant are that he was the supervisor and his duty was to keep a watch over the co-accused persons who were authorized to load currency notes in the ATM machines. The allegations are that the co-accused persons had not loaded the full amount in the ATM Machines as a result of which a total amount of Rs.2,37,76,200/- has been found short. Whether the act of the applicant in not keeping an eagle eye on the conduct of the co-accused, was only a dereliction from his duties or whether he too was involved in the conspiracy, is a question which is yet to be investigated. However, as the investigation is pending, therefore, the 2 application for grant of bail is rejected at this stage."
While rejecting the first bail application, the manner in which the matter was being handled by the Investigating Agency and considering the serious nature of allegations, this Court had directed to send a copy of the said order to the Director General of Police, State of Madhya Pradesh as well as Superintendent of Police, Vidisha for necessary information but it is not known that what steps were taken by Superior Officers to ensure the thorough investigation as well as the role played by each and every person against which the allegations were made with regard to misappropriation of huge amount of Rs.2,37,76,200/- be that as it may.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail from 01.07.2017 and the allegations are that the co-accused Devi Singh and Ajay Mahavar were deputed by the concerning Agency for loading the cash amount in the ATM machines. It is the allegation against the applicant that he was working as a supervisor. It is submitted that the police after completing the investigation has filed the charge-sheet. However, in the entire charge-sheet not a single document has been filed by the prosecution Agency showing that the applicant has signed even a single document verifying that the co- accused Devi Singh and Ajay Mahavar have uploaded the requisite amount in the ATM machines. It is further submitted that there is nothing on the record to suggest that the applicant in any manner was a party to the conspiracy hatched by the co- accused Devi Singh and Ajay Mahavar. It is further submitted that the police has shown the recovery of Rs.18,000/- from the possession of the applicant which in fact was his hard earned 3 money. The trial is likely to take sufficiently long time. There is no possibility of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution case. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the case of other co-accused persons.
Per-contra, application is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the State. However, after going through the complete case diary, it was fairly conceded by the State that except by saying that the applicant was working as supervisor, there is nothing on record to show that the applicant in any manner was responsible for uploading of the cash amount in the ATM machines or he was in any manner was monitoring the working of co-accused Devi Singh and Ajay Mahavar.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court to appear before the Court on the dates given by the concerned Court.
This order shall remain effective till the end of the trial but in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the Director General of Police, State of Madhya Pradesh as well as Superintendent of Police, Vidisha for necessary compliance.
Certified copy as per rules.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge bj/-