Madhya Pradesh High Court
Manish vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 December, 2023
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
ON THE 15 th OF DECEMBER, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 50499 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
MANISH S/O PANNALAL LODHA, AGED ABOUT 21
Y E A R S , OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O VILLAGE
SUKHEDA TEHSIL PIPLODA DISTT.RATLAM (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI RITU RAJ BHATNAGAR, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
APPLICANT.)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION PIPLODA DISTT.
RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI VIRAJ GODHA, LEARNED P.L. FOR THE STATE.)
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 51376 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
ARVIND KUMAR SINGH @ SINGHANIYA S/O
SHIVMANGALSINGHJI SENGAR, AGED ABOUT 35
YEARS, OCCUPATION: LABOUR CHOTA TELPA RAWAL
TELA, POST SAHABGANJ TAHA TOWN DISTT. CHAPRA
SARANG (BIHAR)
.....APPLICANT
(SHRI ASHISH GUPTA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT.)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION PIPLODA, DISTT.
RATLAM (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: AJIT
KAMALASANAN
Signing time: 18-12-2023
18:46:43
2
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI VIRAJ GODHA, LEARNED P.L. FOR THE STATE.)
These bail applications coming on for admission this day, th e court
passed the following:
ORDER
Heard with the aid of case diary.
These bail applications filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicants, in connection with FIR/Crime No.258/2023, Date:-(Not mentioned) registered at P.S.-Piploda, District-Ratlam (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D, 120-B/34 of the IPC.
2. Prosecution story, in brief is that on 16/07/2023 on the basis of secret information that applicant Manish and co-accused Pushkar were counterfeiting Indian currency notes of Rs.500/- and are preparing to use them in market. On the basis of aforementioned intimation, the police reached at the spot and it was found that inside of an electronic shop, the applicant Manish and co-accused Pushkar were present. There was a running colour printer, a laptop and white printing papers were present over there. Counterfeited notes of Rs.500/- were scattered inside the room. On checking the notes, they were found to be counterfeited. 62 counterfeited notes worth of Rs.500/- each, 4 pages counterfeited notes of Rs.500/-, 1 colour printer (black), 1 HP laptop, A4 white blank pages, 1 Vivo mobile phone, 1 Techno mobile phone, paper cutter, scale, piece of glass were seized from present applicant Manish. During investigation it was also found that the applicant Arvind Kumar Singh also makes counterfeited currency and supplies the same in the market by help of co-accused persons and others. On 26/07/2023 the police had also seized 2 printers, a glass, 2 scale, 3 cutters, screen coating paint, 2 wipers, tape, A4 sized plain papers, butter Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 18-12-2023 18:46:43 3 paper, 80 notes printed on one side of paper and other materials for the purpose of counterfeiting currency notes from the present applicant Arvind Kumar Singh alias Singhaniya, from his house situated at village Chota Telpa Rawal, Tola Chapra, Distt.- Chapra, Bihar.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants/ accused persons submits that, the applicants have not committed the offence and have falsely been implicated in the case. Co-accused Kartik Sharma is given benefit of bail by this court vide order dated 18/10/2023 in MCRC no. 46901/ 2023. The case of present applicants is identical with the case of aforementioned co-accused person. Therefore, the applicants are also entitled for bail on the basis of similarity. The applicant Manish is in custody since 16/07/2023 and applicant Arvind since 26/07/2023. No further custodial interrogation is required. After investigation chargesheet has been filed. Trial will take considerable long time for its disposal, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.
4. On other hand learned counsel for the state/ non-applicant has opposed the prayer and submits that the case of present applicants is different from case of co-accused Kartik Sharma. The offence is serious in nature. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled for bail.
5. Having heard learned counsels for the parties, perused the case-diary also considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in view of this court, it is not a fit case to grant bail to the applicants. Resultantly, applications for bail are rejected.
(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE ajit Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 18-12-2023 18:46:43 4 Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 18-12-2023 18:46:43