Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arvind Kumar Singh @ Singhaniya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 July, 2024
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta
1 MCRC-14786-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
ON THE 25th OF JULY, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 14786 of 2024
ARVIND KUMAR SINGH @ SINGHANIYA
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ashish Gupta- Advocate.
Shri Rahul Solanki- Govt. Advocate.
ORDER
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is repeat second bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant, in connection with FIR/Crime No.258/2023, Date:-(Not mentioned) registered at P.S.-Piploda, District- Ratlam (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D, 120-B/34 of the IPC.
2. First bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 15.12.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No.51376/2023.
3. Prosecution story, in brief is that on 16/07/2023 on the basis of secret information that co-accused Manish and Pushkar were counterfeiting Indian currency notes of Rs.500/- and are preparing to use them in market. Police reached at the spot and it was found that inside of an electronic shop, the co-accused Manish and Pushkar were present. There was a running Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 26-07-2024 11:57:34 2 MCRC-14786-2024 colour printer, a laptop and white printing papers were present over there. Counterfeited notes of Rs.500/- were scattered inside the room. On checking the notes, they were found to be counterfeited. 62 counterfeited notes worth of Rs.500/- each, 4 pages counterfeited notes of Rs.500/-, 1 colour printer (black), 1 HP laptop, A4 white blank pages, 1 Vivo mobile phone, 1 Techno mobile phone, paper cutter, scale, piece of glass were seized from co- accused Manish. During investigation it was revealed that present applicant Arvind Kumar Singh@ Singhaniya also makes counterfeited currency and supplies the same in the market by help of co-accused persons and others. On 26/07/2023 the police had also seized 2 printers, a glass, 2 scales, 3 cutters, screen coating paint, 2 wipers, tape, A4 sized plain papers, butter papers, 80 notes printed on one side of paper and other materials for the purpose of counterfeiting currency notes from the present applicant Arvind Kumar Singh@ Singhaniya, from his house situated at village Chota Telpa Rawal, Tola Chapra, Distt.- Chapra, Bihar.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant/ accused person submits that the applicant has not committed the offence and has falsely been implicated in the case. It is submitted that applicant is in custody since 26.07.2023. It is clear from the status report received from trial court that after dismissal of first bail application on 15.12.2023 only two prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial court and other witnesses are yet to be examined. Conclusion of trial will take long time for its disposal therefore, in these changed circumstance applicant is entitled for grant of bail.
5. On the other hand, learned G.A. for the State opposed the prayer of Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 26-07-2024 11:57:34 3 MCRC-14786-2024 the applicant and submits that offence is serious in nature and there is no change in circumstances therefore applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.
6. On perusal of the status report dated 20.07.2024 received from trial court it is clear that case was committed to the trial court on 25.11.2023 for trial, thereafter on 08.01.2024 one co-accused filed an application under section 9 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 and thereafter, on 18.01.2024 present applicant also filed and application before the trial court and on 04.03.2024 both the applications had been dismissed by the trial court as not pressed. On 14.03.2024 learned trial court had framed charges against the applicant and co-accused persons and from 09.05.2024 to 04.06.2024 two prosecution witnesses have been examined.
7. Having considered the submissions advanced from counsel for the parties, also considering the facts and circumstances, it appears that there is no inordinate delay and there is no change in circumstances after dismissal of first bail application hence, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to grant bail to the applicant. Resultantly, M.Cr.C. is dismissed.
(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE ajit Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 26-07-2024 11:57:34