Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shailendra Kumar Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 November, 2020
Author: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
Bench: Rajeev Kumar Dubey
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-2428-2020
(SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.)
1
Jabalpur, Dated : 06-11-2020
Shri A.S. Baghel, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri A. Rajeshwar Rao, learned counsel for the
respondent/EOW.
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Order is dictated, prepared on separate sheets, signed and
dated.
(Sanjay Yadav) (Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
Acting Chief Justice Judge
m/-
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA
Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRA-2428-2020
(SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.)
2
06-11-2020
Per: Rajeev Kumar Dubey, J.
Heard on I.A.No.4935/2020, which is an application U/S.389 (1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of the custodial sentence passed against appellant Shailendra Kumar Jain through Video Conferencing.
2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 29/02/2020 passed by Special Judge, (Prevention of Corruption) Act, Bhopal in Special Case No.3/2008, whereby learned Special Judge found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 467 r/w Section 471, 468 and 420 r/w 120-B of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. For 10 years with fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.1,00,000/- respectively with default clause.
3. As per prosecution case, on the information that some persons in connivance with the Court's employees manipulated the record of some Criminal & Civil Cases and also attached the forged documents and order sheets in these cases pending in various courts of District Court Bhopal, District Judge Bhopal directed Shri R.N Chand, Eleventh ADJ Bhopal to inquire into the matter. In that enquiry, it was found that records of Criminal Case nos.2237/04 and 2730/04 pending in the Court of JMFC/III Civil Judge, Class I Bhopal and the record of disposed of case MJC No. 48/05 Kesarbai Vs Municipal Corporation Bhopal which was deposited in the Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 3 record room of District court Bhopal were manipulated by attaching forged documents and order-Sheets in these cases. It was also found that forged lease deeds of government land were prepared in the name of co-accused Smt. Maya Bisariya, her husband Krishna Prasad Bisariya (who died during the investigation), her son Sanjeev Bisariya and daughters Amita, Alpana and Preeti, Jitendra Singh, Kesarbai, Anees Ahmad Siddiqui, Abdul Qayoom, Muzaffar Ali, Munavvar Ali, Lakshmi Chand Jain and other people and on the basis of these forged lease deeds and other documents, some of them filed civil cases i.e. MJC 48/05 Kesarbai Vs Municipal Corporation Bhopal, Civil Suit No. 86A/03 Kallu Khan Vs Jitendra and others, Civil Suit No.74/05 Jitendra vs. MP Government, Civil Suit No. 91A/03 Jitendra vs Munnalal, MJC no.127/07 Kallu Khan Vs Munnalal and others in various Civil Courts of Bhopal for getting undue benefit and in the matter apart from outsiders, the role of some court employees and Advocates is also suspicious.
4. On the direction of the High Court, Shri P.K. Vyas O.S.D. also conducted an enquiry and found the same. He also opined in his report that the matter is serious, and should be inquired into by the competent investigating agency. Thereafter, District Judge Bhopal wrote a letter to Director-General (Economic Offences Wing Bhopal) to enquire into the matter and also sent the copy of enquiry reports along with the letter. On the direction of Director- General (Economic Offences Wing Bhopal), Crime No.06/07 for Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 4 the offences punishable under Sections 420,447,418,467,468,471 and 120B of IPC was registered at Police Station Economic Offences Wing Bhopal.
5. During the investigation of the Crime, it was found that co- accused Babulal Sunhare, who was earlier posted as a Peon in the Collectorate Office, Bhopal, from the year 2002 to 2006 prepared many forged lease deeds of government lands and sold them to Asharam, Kishori Lal, Benibai and other people, but police did not take any action against him, which encouraged him, due to which his courage increased. He made a gang in which included appellant Shailendra Kumar Jain, co-accused Munnalal, Lakshmi Chand Jain (who died during the trial of the case) and Ravindra Batham and with their help, Babulal started preparing forged lease deeds and other documents and sold government land worth crores of rupees to others on the basis of these forged lease deeds, and to show that said lease deeds are genuine and issued by the competent authority, he also manipulated the record of revenue cases kept in the Nazul Office, Bhopal and also made available certified copies of those manipulated records to the people whom he gave forged lease deeds. Subsequently, he also started manipulation in court records.
6. He manipulated the records of Criminal Case RT No.2237/04 which was pending in the court of JMFC/III Civil Judge Bhopal Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 5 arising out of the charge-sheet filed by the police after investigation of the Crime No.213/79 registered at P.S. Jahangirabad and attached forge documents and order sheets in the record of that case with the help of co-accused Roopshri Jain, who was posted as Criminal Reader in that court and tried to get arrest warrants issued against Asharam, Shyamlal, Santosh, Vinod and Dilip to take revenge from them. He also manipulated the record of Criminal Case No. 2230/04 arising out from the charge sheet of Crime No.678/91 registered at T.T. Nagar, Bhopal for the offence punishable under Sections 457/390 of the IPC and attached one forged report which was allegedly a copy of a report given by Tehsildar in Case nos.112-A/20(1) 85-86 and 87/A-20(1) 95-96, where it was mentioned that Additional Collector, Bhopal by an order passed in case no. 716/A-20(1) 82-83 gave a lease of government land area measuring 6000 square metres to Muzaffar Ali, Munavvar Ali and Anees Ahmed Siddiqui and other documents with the help of Smt. Roopshree Jain. Accused Mohamad Anwar Khan tried to take certified copies of those documents with the help of Smt. Roopshree Jain knowing fully well that the said documents were forged. Babulal also manipulated the record of a decided case MJC No.48/05, Kesar Bai vs. Bhopal Industrial Department and was deposited in the Record Room of District Court, Bhopal and Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 6 annexed a false report allegedly given by Tahsildar Nazul and copy of lease deed no.714/A-20(1) 78-79 and one map.
7. It was also found that appellant Shailendra Kumar Jain and Lakshmi Chand Jain prepared forged lease deed of government land with the help of accused Babulal showing that the lease of government land area 278.81 square metres located at Hamidia Road, Israni market has been issued in favour of relatives of his brother Lakshmi Chand Jain. They also prepared a forged lease deed of 278.81 square metres of government land and also manipulated the record of Case no. 524-A/20(i) 85-86 and appellant Shailendra Kumar Jain filed an application in Collector Office, Bhopal for getting certified copy of that forged record.
8. It was also found that some people on the basis of forged lease deeds of government land and other documents prepared by Babulal in connivance with above-mentioned co-accused persons had filed Civil Cases i.e. Civil Suit no.389A/06 (Mujaffar Ali vs. Munavvar Ali), Civil Suit No.91A/03 (Jitendra Kumar Vs Munnalal), 74A/05 (Jitendra Singh Vs M.P. Government), Civil Case No.86-A/03 (Kallu Khan Vs Jitendra), MJC No.127/07 (Kallu Khan Vs Municipal Corporation Bhopal) and obtained orders in their favour regarding government land and filed charge sheet against co-accused/appellants Babulal Sunhare, Shailendra Kumar Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 7 Jain, Roopshri Jain, Ravindra Batham, Mohd. Anwar Khan and Lakshmi Chand Jain (who died during the trial of the case) and continued the investigation against other suspicious persons.
9. During further investigation, it was found that co-accused Smt. Maya Bisariya, her husband Krishna Prasad Bisariya (who died during investigation of the crime), her son Sanjeev Bisariya, daughters Amita, Alpana and Preeti and co-accused Savitri Bai in connivance with accused Babulal prepared forged lease deed of government land survey no.1560 area 3.20 acres and survey no.1517/1 and 1517/2 total area measuring 2.60 acres showing that the lease of government land of survey no.1560 area 3.20 acres has been given to Smt. Savitri Bai and the lease of government land survey no.1517/1 and 1517/2 total area 2.60 acres has been given to Smt. Maya Bisariya, her husband Krishna Prasad Bisariya (who died during investigation of the crime), her son Sanjeev Bisariya and daughters Amita, Alpana and Preeti and put forged signatures of the Revenue Officer, Yogendra Sharma, Revenue Inspector Rafat-Ullah, Tahsildar, Avinash Kumar Jadhav and Additional Collector, Ajay Singh on that lease deeds. In this regard, they also prepared a forged Revenue Case no.260/A, 20(1) 87-88, settlement case no. 2158/A- 20(1) 95-96 and case no. 202/A-20(1) 87-88 to show the long possession of Smt. Maya Bisariya, her husband Late Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 8 Shri Krishna Prasad Bisariya, son Sanjeev Bisariya, daughters Amita Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya and Preeti Bisariyai and co- accused Savitri Bai over respective lands and to show that the lease deeds of government land survey nos.1517/1 and 1517/2 total area 2.60 acre were issued in favour of Smt. Maya Bisariya, her husband Late Shri Krishna Prasad Bisariya, son Sanjeev Bisariya, daughters Amita Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya, Preeti Bisariya and lease deed of government land survey no. 1560 area 3.20 acres to Smt. Savitri Bai by the competent government official. They also got the records of these forged cases kept in the Record Room of the Nazul Officer, Bhopal and also manipulated the entry register of the office. Earlier Krishna Prasad Bisariya had tried to sell the land on the basis of those forged lease deeds. At that time, an enquiry was conducted in which it was found that the said lease deeds were forged. So, C.P. Nigam Tahsildar capital project lodged a report against appellant Smt. Maya Bisariya, her husband Late Shri Krishna Prasad Bisariya, son Sanjeev Bisariya, daughters Amita Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya, Preeti Bisariya. On that report, Crime No 82/06 was registered at police station M.P. Nagar Bhopal against them for the offences punishable under Sections 420,467,468 and 471 of IPC.
10. It was also found that on the basis of forged lease deed and other forged documents co-accused Smt. Maya Bisariya, Sanjeev Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 9 Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya, Amita Bisariya and Priti Bisariya were also filed Writ Petition no.8494/05 in regard to government land bearing survey no.1517/1 and 1517/2 area 2.6o acre and got an order in their favour from the High Court.
11. It was also found that co-accused Savitri Bai in connivance with Krishna Prasad Bisariya and Sanjeev Bisariya had filed a Civil Suit No. 18A/05 against Krishna Prasad Biisariya and Sanjeev Bisariya, M.P. Government and Municipal Corporation Bhopal averring that she had been in possession of land survey no. 1560 area 3.20 acres for the last 40-45 years. The employees of the Municipal Corporation wrongly encroached it by putting garbage on her land. In that suit, she also made Krishna Prasad Bisariya and Sanjeev Bisariya a party and also averred that she used to work as watchman of the land survey number 1517/1 and 1571/2 which belongs to Krishna Prasad Bisariya and Sanjeev Bisariya. They employed her as a Watchman to guard their land at a salary of Rs.300 per month. In 1997, they sacked her and tried to dispossess her from that land. She filed that civil suit with the intention to grab the government land at the same time strengthening the claim of Krishna Prasad Bisariya, Sanjeev Bisariya, that land survey no. 1516/1 &1516/2 belongs to Krishna Prasad Bisariya and his family members. She also got an order in her favour from the High Court Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 10 over that land. She also filed an application under order 13 rule 10 for calling the record of revenue case 202/A/68/76-77 and case no.2158/A/20/1/95-96 to show her long possession on that land knowing fully well that these records were forged. In that case co- accused, Sanjeev Bisariya filed a written statement averring that he has been in possession of land survey no.1516/1 & 1516/2 area 2.60 acres and the government gave that land to him and his father Krishna Prasad Bisariya, co-accused Smt. Maya Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya, Amita Bisariya and Priti Bisariya on lease and also issued lease deeds of that land in their favour. So, police also filed a supplementary charge sheet against co-accused Smt. Maya Bisariya, Sanjeev Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya, Amita Bisariya, Priti Bisariya and Savitri Bai.
12. Learned trial Court after the trial found the appellant guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 467 r/w Section 471, 468 and 420 r/w 120-B of the IPC and sentenced him as mentioned above.
13. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant allegedly in connivance with another co-accused Babulal prepared forged lease deed showing that the lease of government land area 278.81 square metres located at Hamidia Road, Israni market has been issued in favour of relatives of his brother Lakshmi Chand Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 11 Jain, while there is no direct evidence on record to show that the appellant prepared any forged document. As far as the handwriting expert report is concerned, the handwriting expert has given the report by comparing the signatures found on the questioned documents with the appellant's signature found on an application allegedly filled by the appellant under R.T.I. Act but there is no evidence on record to show that said RTI application was filed by the appellant. So, only on the basis of a handwriting expert report, it can not be said that the appellant prepared any forged documents. He further submitted that other co-accused Maya Bisariya has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court and the case of the appellant is similar to co-accused Maya Bisariya. The appellant has been in custody since 29/02/2020. The hearing of the appeal will take time. So, the jail sentence of the appellant be suspended and he be released on bail.
14. Learned counsel for the respondent/EOW opposed the prayer and submitted that the case of the appellant is not similar to co- accused Maya Bisariya, who has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court and other co-accused persons namely Savitri Bai, Sanjeev Bisariya, Amita Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya and Preeti Bisariya, who have been granted bail by this Court. Hon'ble Apex Court granted bail to co-accused Maya Bisariya vide order dated Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 12 24/08/2020 passed in SLP(Crl.) no.3714/2020 considering the fact that she is an 83 year old lady while the appellant is only 65 years old. Even against co-accused Maya Bisariya and other co-accused persons namely Savitri Bai, Sanjeev Bisariya, Amita Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya and Preeti Bisariya, who have been granted bail by this Court, there is no handwriting expert report on record to show that they themselves prepared any forged document while from the handwriting expert report, it is clear that the appellant prepared forged documents. So, appellant is not entitled to get bail on the basis of parity.
15. He further submitted that the appellant in connivance with co-accused Babulal prepared forged lease deed of government land showing that the lease of government land area measuring 278.81 square metres, located at Hamidia Road, Israni market has been issued in favour of relatives of his brother Lakshmi Chand Jain. He also prepared a forged lease deed of 278.81 square metres of government land and also manipulated the record of revenue Case no. 524-A/20(i) 85-86. Handwriting expert has given the report by comparing the signatures of appellant found on the questioned document with the specimen signature of the appellant taken by the police during investigation of the crime. As also mentioned by the learned trial Court in para 149 of its judgement. The guilt of the Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 13 appellant is clearly proven from the prosecution evidence. So, he should not be released on bail.
16. The case of the appellant is not similar to co-accused Maya Bisariya, who has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court and the other co-accused persons namely Savitri Bai, Sanjeev Bisariya, Amita Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya and Preeti Bisariya, who have been granted bail by this Court. There is no handwriting expert report on record to show that co-accused Maya, Savitri Bai, Sanjeev Bisariya, Amita Bisariya, Alpana Bisariya and Preeti Bisariya themselves prepared any forged documents while from the handwriting expert report and other evidence on record, it is clear that appellant Shailendra Kumar Jain prepared forged documents. So, appellant is not entitled to get bail on the basis of parity.
17. Appellant Shailendra Kumar Jain in connivance with co- accused Babulal had prepared forged lease deeds of government land and also manipulated the record of revenue cases. In this case, not only forged documents were prepared but also the records of civil courts and criminal courts were manipulated and forged documents were also attached in these cases with ulterior motive. This act shook the faith of the general public in the judiciary. So, looking to the seriousness of the case, this Court is not inclined to Signature Not Verified SAN Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH CRA-2428-2020 (SHAILENDRA KUMAR JAIN V STATE OF M.P.) 14 suspend the custodial sentence of the appellant. Hence I.A. is hereby rejected.
18. However, the appellant is free to renew his prayer, if this appeal is not listed for final hearing within a reasonable period.
C.C. as per rules.
(Sanjay Yadav) (Rajeev Kumar Dubey)
Acting Chief Justice Judge
m/-
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by MONIKA CHOURASIA
Date: 2020.11.07 13:47:43 IST