Madhya Pradesh High Court
Narendra Kumar Sharma vs C.B.I. on 27 June, 2017
MCRC-7136-2017
(NARENDRA KUMAR SHARMA Vs C.B.I.)
27-06-2017
Shri Ramesh Tamrakar, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri J.K. Jain, learned ASG for the respondent- CBI.
Heard. Perused the case diary.
This is the first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
The applicant is in custody since 14.4.2014, in connection with Crime No.RC No.009 2005 S 0014, registered at Police Station CBI Jabalpur, District Jabalpur (MP), for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 of IPC.
As per prosecution, applicant and his brother Promod Sharma are the Proprietors of M/s Akanchha Builders. The applicant connived with one Arvind Kumar Shrivastava, who was working as Branch Manager, State Bank of India, GCF Branch, Jabalpur, and got approved loans in the name of different persons for purchase of flats on the basis of forged pay slips. Some of the flats are not existing due to forged sale deed. For the purposes of procuring loans, some forged documents were prepared, produced before the bank and the loan amounts were credited to the account of said M/s Akanchha Builders.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 14.4.2014 and till date all prosecution witnesses have not been examined by the prosecution. The Court has been lying vacant. There is no chance of conclusion of trial in near future. Other co- accused have been released on bail. He 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.
Learned ASG appearing on behalf of CBI, submits that number of cases are pending against the applicant before the trial Court. He has also been convicted in some other cases of same nature. He further submits that one reason of not recording evidence of prosecution witnesses is that the applicant himself remained absconded for about more than seven years. On these grounds, learned ASG opposes the bail application of the applicant.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation against the applicant, it would not be appropriate to grant bail to the applicant, at this stage, before recording of all relevant material witnesses.
Accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of Cr.P.C is dismissed.
(H.P. SINGH) J (H.P. SINGH) JUDGE A.Praj.