Madhya Pradesh High Court
Raghav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 4 January, 2024
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 4 th OF JANUARY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 56734 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
RAGHAV S/O PRAMOD SETHI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/O 1 GULMOHAR EXTENSION INDORE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI ARJUN PATHAK, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
STATION TUKOGANJ INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI TARUN PAGARE - PUBLIC PROSECUTOR)
This application coming on for orders this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This is second application under section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with crime No. 307/2020 registered at P.S. Tukoganj, Indore for the offence punishable under sections 420, 406, 409, 506 and 34 of IPC and under section 6(1) of M.P. Nikshepako Ke Hito Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000.
The first application was filed along with co-accused Pramod Sethi i.e. M.Cr.C.NO. 33001/2022 which was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file separate applications for the applicants.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 05-01-2024 17:54:48 22. An objection has been raised regarding maintainability of anticipatory bail application in view of the provisions of section 14 of Adhiniyam, 2000. The provisions of section 14 of the Act reads as under :-
"14 - Anticipatory bail not be granted - Notwithstanding anything contained in section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (No.2 of 1974), no Court shall grant anticipatory bail to any person under the Act."
3. The said issue has been considered by this Court in M.Cr.C.No. 24427/2023 (Pramod Sethi and others Vs. State of M.P. and others) and after considering the various judgments of Apex Court and High Courts held that application for anticipatory bail is maintainable and the bar under section 14 of the Adhiniyam 2000 would not apply in the cases where no prima facie material exists warranting arrest in the complaint and where the complaint does not make out a prima facie case. The Court has power and jurisdiction to consider the application for grant of anticipatory bail in appropriate case of exceptional nature and the bar under section 14 would not come in the way to consider the application under section 438 of Cr.P.C.
4. It is alleged that applicant and other co-accused persons are Directors of the company and they are involved in real estate and construction work. The complainant Himanshu Sharma and other complainants filed a complaint dated 30.6.2020 alleging that the co-accused Pramod Sethi and other accused persons had induced them to make investment in their upcoming project and to become partner of the said project and they will get the fixed profit. On the assurance of the accused persons who were Directors of the companies, the amount was Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 05-01-2024 17:54:48 3 transferred to the account of Directors of the company. Some payment was made by the Directors but thereafter they stopped payment. The fixed profit was not granted to the complainant.
5. Counsel for the applicant argued that present FIR is based on the complaint of seven complainants and out of 7 complainants, only one complainant Shilpika Ganeriwal has alleged that she had invested a sum of Rs.20 Lacs and transferred the same in the account of the present applicant. It is submitted that remaining six complainants are relatable to the co-accused Rohan Sethi, who has been granted regular bail by the Apex Court. It is argued that the complainant Shilpka Ganeriwal has admitted that a sum of Rs.4,27,000/- has already been received by the said complainant. It is further submitted that entire amount of Rs.20 Lacs was not due and only a sum of Rs.5,94,000/- was due on 4.6.2020 for which the applicant had given cheque bearing No. 000647 for a sum of Rs.5,94,000/- to the said complainant. The applicant had also issued a undated security cheque of Rs.20 Lacs to the complainant. It is argued that the anticipatory bail of co-accused Pramod Sethi was rejected by this Court by order dated 21.9.2023 in M.Cr.C.No. 24427/2023. Against the said order, co-accused Pramod Sethi had filed SLP No. 14907/2023. By order dated 11.12.2023, Apex Court has granted interim protection to the said accused that he may not to arrested in the said crime number. It is further argued that main accused is Pramod Sethi, who is father of the applicant and not the present applicant. It is vehementally argued that so far as transaction with complainant Shilpika Ganeriwal is concerned, that was a transaction relating to personal loan of the applicant and not any transaction relating to investment in the company.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for State opposed the prayer for grant of Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 05-01-2024 17:54:48 4 anticipatory bail and submitted that FIR has been registered by name against the present applicant and there are as many as 7 complainants in the present crime number i.e. 307/2020. Apart from this, there are two other cases i.e. crime No. 542/2021 and criminal case including crime No. 542/2021 have been registered against the applicant at P.S. Tukoganj, Indore for commission of offence under sections 420, 409, 506 of IPC. The investigation under section 173(8) Cr.P.C. is still pending against the applicant. The applicant is a habitual criminal. He further argued that one of the complainant Manish Ganeriwal has made a specific statement in his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. that Rs.20 Lacs was transferred in the account of present applicant and there is no material to indicate that transaction with the complainant Shilpika Ganeriwal was transaction of personal loan.
7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, it transpires that specific allegation has been made in the FIR and also in the statement of Manish Ganeriwal that Rs.20 Lacs was transferred in the account of the present applicant. There is no material to indicate that transaction with complainant Shilpika Ganeriwal was regarding personal loan. Thus, the present case is not a case where no prima facie material is available against the applicant. Since prima facie material is available, bar of anticipatory bail under section 14 of Adhiniyam 2000 would attract.
8. So far as contention of the applicant regarding interim anticipatory bail granted to the co-accused Pramod Sethi is concerned, the Apex Court has granted interim protection on the argument of Pramod Sethi that he has not issued cheuqes but cheques were issued by his son and affidavit filed on his behalf that no proceeding under sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. has been Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 05-01-2024 17:54:48 5 initiated, the Court has granted interim anticipatory bail to the father of applicant and fixed the matter in the week commencing 16.1.2024. Father of the applicant has alleged that alleged forged cheques and transactions were made by his sons including the present applicant whereas the present applicant has alleged that father Pramod Sethi is main accused and mastermind of all fraud and cheating. Thus, accused persons are making allegations against each other. Apart from that, interim protection granted by the Apex Court would not render any assistance to the case of present applicant as the said order is not on merit.
9. Considering the allegation made in the FIR, the statement of Manish Ganeriwal, absence of any document to show transaction with complainant Shilpika Ganeriwal as personal loan and bar for anticipatory bail under section 14 of Adhiniyam, 2000 and the fact that appliant is absconding since year 2020, I do not find any case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.
M.Cr.C. is accordingly dismissed.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) JUDGE MK Signature Not Verified Signed by: MUKTA CHANDRASHEKHAR KOUSHAL Signing time: 05-01-2024 17:54:48