Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sourabh Mourya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 August, 2020
Author: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
Bench: Rajendra Kumar Srivastava
1 MCRC-26187-2020
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-26187-2020
(SOURABH MOURYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
1
Jabalpur, Dated : 07-08-2020
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Surendra Singh, Senior Advocate with Shri Aswani Kumar Dubey,
learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Manoj Singh, learned P.L for the respondent/State.
Heard.
This is first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The applicant is in custody since 28.06.2020 in connection with Crime No.99/2020 registered at Police Station-Crime Branch Bhopal, District- Bhopal (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 read with Section 120-B of the IPC.
As per prosecution case, Complainant-Dr. Harisingh Chourasiya was posted as Assistant Professor in the Government Medical College and Hospital Chhunabhatti, Bhopal, District-Bhopal. Prior to four months of the said incident he was posted as Assistant Director at Satpura Bhawan, Bhopal. Co-accused-Indrajeet Singh and complainant were good friends and co- accused-Indrajeet Singh is a permanent resident of District-Gwalior. On 05.06.2020, co-accused-Indrajeet Singh met the complainant then he informed that complainant was transferred as Registrar of Ayush Ayurvigyan University, Jabalpur. In this regard, co-accused-Indrajeet Singh also shown him the order purportedly issued from the Office of the Chief Minister ordering the transfer of the complainant and the said order was also sent by whatsapp to the complainant. On 06.06.2020, complainant again met co- accused-Indrajeet Singh, at that time, co-accused was accompanied Shailendra Bhadouriya and co-accused-Indrajeet informed the complainant that his transfer would be finalized as soon as the new Government was 2 MCRC-26187-2020 formed and the said transfer orders would be obtained by one Shailendra Bhadouriya and present applicant, namely, Sourabh Mourya. Co-accused- Indrajeet Singh has also informed him that in this regard, one Shailendra Bhadouriya spent sum of Rs.5,00,000/- and an additional Rs.5,00,000/- are required for the said purpose then complainant felt suspicion about the aforesaid transfer order being fake and he told him that he has no money.
Thereafter, on the complaint of the complainant, a case has been registered against the present applicant and other co-accused for the alleged offences.
Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that applicant is in jail since 28.06.2020. Present applicant has not prepared any forged documents. Present applicant has not committed any offence and also not taken any money. The present applicant is permanent resident of District-Bhopal so, there is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the evidence of the prosecution. A computer and printer were seized from the office of the present applicant on suspicion that the said note-sheet pertaining to the transfer was generated from his computer, but it is not proved that the said order was generated through the said computer or that the said printer was used to print the said order. Present applicant is a contractor and doing construction work at Bhopal as well as another places therefore, he was not present whole time in his office, therefore there is every possibility that in the absence of present applicant, other persons have misused his office computer and printer. The police has recorded a confessional statement of the present applicant, but this would be inadmissible in evidence under Section 24 of Evidence Act and as well as Section 162 of the Cr.P.C. As per prosecution case itself, present applicant did not meet the complainant and not demanded any money from him. It is not the case of prosecution that present applicant ever met the complainant or he represented to him that he would obtain the said transfer order of complainant or he demanded any money from him. It is no longer res integra 3 MCRC-26187-2020 that a statement by other co-accused does not constitute substantive evidence against the present applicant and it is also well settled law that statement of other co-accused recorded under Section 30 of the Evidence Act does not constitute any substantive piece of evidence. It is not proved that as to who generated the fabricated note-sheet showing the transfer of a complainant. Therefore, no case is made out against the present applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468 of the IPC. There is no criminal antecedent against the present applicant. Investigation is completed. The applicant is ready to furnish bail as per the order, abiding with all conditions imposed by the Court. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
Per-contra, learned P.L. for respondent-State opposes the bail application.
After hearing arguments of the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is no criminal antecedent against the present applicant, trial will take time for its final disposal, applicant is in jail since 28.06.2020, there is no probability of his absconding or tampering with the evidence of the prosecution, due to Covid-19 the trial of the said case is withheld in the trial Court, I am of the considered view that it would be appropriate to release the applicant on bail. Therefore, without commenting on merits of the case, application of the present applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seems to be acceptable. Consequently, it is hereby allowed.
It is directed that applicant-Sourabh Mourya be released on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned trial Court for his appearance before it on the dates given by the concerned Court. It is also directed that applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C. In view of the outbreak of 'Corona Virus disease (COVID-19)' the applicant shall also comply with the 4 MCRC-26187-2020 rules and norms of social distancing.
Further, in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in suo moto W.P.No.1/2020, it would be appropriate to issue the following direction to the jail authority :-
1. The Jail Authority shall ensure the medical examination of the applicant by the jail doctor before his release.
2. The applicant shall not be released if he is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease'. For this purpose appropriate tests will be carried out.
3 . If it is found that the applicant is suffering from 'Corona Virus disease', necessary steps will be taken by the concerned authority by placing him in appropriate quarantine facility.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA) JUDGE sp Digitally signed by SAVITRI PATEL Date: 2020.08.10 16:15:07 +05'30'