Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh Rai vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 August, 2019
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
1 MCRC-31981-2019
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
MCRC-31981-2019
(RAJESH RAI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Jabalpur, Dated : 22-08-2019
Shri S.K. Gangrade, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Satyendra Jyotishi, learned G.A. for the respondent/State.
This is first bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Applicant Rajesh Rai was arrested on 31/05/2019 in connection with Crime No.411/2019 registered at Police Station Nishatpura, District Bhopal for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120-B of the IPC.
As per the prosecution case on 21/04/2019 Pradeep Malik Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti, Bhopal lodged a written complaint at Police Station Nishatpura, District Bhopal averring that M/s Siyaram Enterprises was registered at Krishi Upadj Mandi Samiti, Karond, Distt. Bhopal. Co-accused Ashish Gupta was the proprietor of the said firm, who used to purchase grain from farmers at Mandi premises, Karod. It is further alleged that he purchased paddy from various farmers for a sum of Rs.73,38,402/- and he also purchased grains from other various Mandis for a sum of Rs.2,98,74,210 & Rs.2,03,98,840/- and total sum of Rs.5,76,11,452/- was due on him, which was not paid by the co-accused Ashish Gupta to the farmers. Even for payment of some of that amount, he gave post-dated cheques to some farmers, which were also dishonoured, so action be taken against him. On that Police registered Crime No.411/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 120-B of the IPC and investigated the matter. During investigation it was also found that applicant Rajesh Rai instigated the farmers to sale their grain to co-accused Ashish Gupta and in lieu of that co-accused Ashish Gupta gave commission to him. It was also found that applicant purchased the paddy of Rs.3,95,00,000/- from farmers and supplied it to co- accused Ashish Gupta. Out of the aforesaid amount, only a sum of Rs.2,70,00,000/- was paid to farmers and the remaining amount was not paid by the applicant and co-accused Ashish Gupta to the farmers and applicant Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 26/08/2019 12:58:53 2 MCRC-31981-2019 embezzled that amount.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the offence. Applicant is a broker. He supplied the grain to co-accused Ashish Gupta. Because Ashish Gupta did not pay the price of that grain to him, due to which he could not pay the amount to farmers. There is no evidence on record to show that Asish Gupta paid him all the amount of grain supplied by the applicant to him and even then he did not pay the amount to the farmers and embezzled that amount. The applicant is in custody since 31/05/2019 and conclusion of the trial will take time, hence it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposed the prayer and submitted that sufficient evidence is available against the applicant to connect him with the offence in question, so he should not be released on bail.
It appears from the record that applicant is broker. He supplied the grain to co-accused Ashish Gupta. Because Ashish Gupta did not pay the price of that grain to him, due to which he could not pay the amount to farmers. There is no evidence on record to show that Asish Gupta paid him all the amount of grain supplied by the applicant to him and even then he did not pay the amount to the farmers and embezzled that amount.
So, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the applicant is in custody since 31/05/2019 and conclusion of trial is likely to take long time, without commenting on the merits of the case the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned C.J.M/trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during the pendency of trial.
This order will remain operative subject to compliance of the following Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 26/08/2019 12:58:53 3 MCRC-31981-2019 conditions by the applicant :
1. The applicant will comply with all the terms and conditions of the bond executed by him ;
2. The applicant will cooperate in the trial;
3. The applicant will not indulge himself in extending inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the fact of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police Officer, as the case may be;
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused;
5. The applicant will not seek unnecessary adjournments during the trial; and
6. The applicant will not leave India without previous permission of the trial Court.
Certified copy as per rules.
(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE as Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 26/08/2019 12:58:53