Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sumit Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 November, 2022
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
ON THE 25th OF NOVEMBER, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55535 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
SUMIT JAIN S/O SURENDRA KUMAR JAIN,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
BUSINESSMAN R/O 3003, KANCHAN REVENUE,
TULSI NAGAR CHERITAL JABALPUR (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPLICANT
(BY SHRI PANKAJ DUBEY, ADVOCATE)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION KOTWALI DISTRICT
JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI MANAS MANI VERMA, GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
Thi s is first application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity "Cr.P.C") for grant of bail to the applicant Sumit Jain S/o Surendra Kumar Jain, who is in custody since 14/11/2022 in connection with Crime No.848/2021 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Signature Not Verified SANLearned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2022.11.25 17:15:08 IST 2 innocent. He is falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the present applicant is licensee stamp vendor. He sold stamp which was not forged or fabricated. Allegation on the present applicant is that he was directing the persons purchasing stamps towards Prateek Jain, who impersonated Shri Anand Mohan Choudhary and was carrying out notarial work representing himself to be Shri Anand Mohan Choudhary. It is submitted that main occupation of applicant is selling stamp papers and there is no allegation of stamp being tempered or forged. Investigation is complete. Charge-sheet has been filed and trial is going to take time. Hence, prayer is made to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Learned Government Advocate for the State on the other hand opposes the bail application.
After hearing counsel for the parties and considering other facts & circumstances of the case and the fact that charge-sheet has been filed and also with a view to maintain parity as co-accused Prateek Jain, who is main accused has already been extended benefit of bail vide order dated 01/08/2022 passed in M.Cr.C.No.35972/2022, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to grant benefit of bail to the applicant. Hence, without commenting anything on merits of the matter, this application is allowed.
It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with Signature Not Verified two solvent sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Trial SAN Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Court for his appearance before the Court on the dates given by the Date: 2022.11.25 17:15:08 IST 3 concerned Court during pendency of trial. It is further directed that the applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437(3) of the Cr. P. C. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump and breach of any of the pre-condition of bail, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE as Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2022.11.25 17:15:08 IST