Mayurkumar Narsingbhai Damor vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 17165 Guj

R/CR.MA/11042/2021                              CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 11042 of 2021


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
==========================================================

1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed No to see the judgment ?

2    To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                         No

3    Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy               No
     of the judgment ?

4    Whether this case involves a substantial question               No

of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ?

========================================================== MAYURKUMAR NARSINGBHAI DAMOR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance:

DARSHIT R BRAHMBHATT(8011) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR.MANAN MEHTA, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

Date : 15/11/2021

CAV JUDGMENT

By way of the present application under Section 439 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, applicant has prayed to

release him on regular bail in connection with the FIR

registered being I-C.R No.11821008200746 of 2020 before

R/CR.MA/11042/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021

Dahod Rural Police Station, District: Dahod for the offence

punishable under Sections 406, 420, r/w. 120B of IPC and

Section 66(d) of I.T.Act as well as Section Section 13(1)(a) and

13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted in his

arguments that applicant is falsely implicated by the

prosecution as he has not committed any offence as alleged in

the FIR. That, initially the alleged offence was triable by

learned Magistrate and maximum punishment was 7 years but

thereafter, investigating agency has added Section 13(1)(a) and

13(2) of Prevention of Correuption Act, 1988 That, the applicant

is working as a computer operator and he had no authorisation

to verify the documents and therefore, he has become scapegoat

in the said offence. That, in the said FIR, investigation is over

and police has filed the charge-sheet. That, in the entire charge-

sheet there is not iota of evidence against the applicant to

involve in the alleged offence. That, the applicant is not a

publice servant and working as an outsourcing computer

operator. There is only allegation in the FIR against the

R/CR.MA/11042/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021

applicant that he has given user ID to co-accused persons and

thereby misappropriated Government money are completely

false allegation and hence, it was requested by learned advocate

appearing for the applicant to enlarge the applicant on regular

bail with suitable conditions. It is further submitted that

applicant has shown his bonafide by depositing Rs.7,70,000/-

before the Sessions Court, Dahod.

Per contra, learned APP appearing for the respondent-State

has stronlgy objected the arguments advanced by learned

advocate for the applicant and submitted that the complainant

himself is a Government official working with the District

Panchayat as Agriculture Officer. As per the case of the

prosecution, the accused persons, in connivance with each other

had created the bogus and forged application of agriculturist and

obtained financial benefit in terms of Rs.2000/- of each

applicant, as per the scheme of the Central Government namely

PRADHANMANTRI KISAN SAMMAN NIDHI YOJNA.

That, out of 32717 persons, 1191 persons have got the financial

benefits which comes to Rs. 23,82,000/- . That, active

R/CR.MA/11042/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021

participation was made by the present applicant in commiting

the offence and therefore, after completion of investigation,

investigating agency had submitted the charge-sheet on

10.6.2021 before the competent court wherein, present

applicant is placed at accused No.1 in the charge-sheet. That,

during the investigation, it was found that total amount of fraud

was reached to Rs. 9,06,24,000/-. That, peresent applicant is the

prime accused of the entire crime as he was working as District

Leval Enterpreneur DLE - District Panchayat. That, because of

his position as Distrcit Level Enterpreneur, he had wrongfully

got the digital user ID by which he can directly submitted an

application , by passing one stage of verification at the Taluka

level. That, during the course of investigation, it was found that

by misusing 3 Master Digital User ID, the applicant had created

bogus 78 User ID and same were given to the other accused

persons by which various applications were submitted, approved

and ultimately those persons have successful in getting the

financial gain under the scheme of PRADHANMANTRI

KISAN SAMMAN NIDHI YOJNA. That during the course of

R/CR.MA/11042/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021

investigation, all such bogus ID's have been utilised and created

by using the master key by the applicant. That, the applicant has

played master role in the entire offence. That, user ID had been

submitted and provided by the applicant to the other accused

persons from which the bogus application were processed. That,

other 14 accused are yet to be arrested by the prosecution as

they are not avaialble and absconded and investigation is

continuted against them. Considering the above said material

and involvement of the present applicant in the offence learned

APP, has requested to dismiss the application.

Having gone through the contents of the FIR and

subimission made by Learned Advocate appearing for the

applicant as well as learned APP, appearing for the state and

document produced on the record, affidavit filed by the

investigating officer before this Court it reveals that initially the

offence was registered under sections 406, 420 ansd 120B of

IPC as well as under section 66(d) of IT Act. The complainant

lodged the complaint against unknown persons. As per

prosecution case, the accused perasons in connivance with each

R/CR.MA/11042/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021

other, had created bogus and forged application of agriculturist

and obtained financial benefit in terms of RS. 2000/- of each

applicant, as per the scheme of the central government namely

PRADHANMANTRI KISAN SAMMAN NIDHI YOJNA.

Subsequently section 13 (1)(A), 13 (2) of Prevention of

Corruption Act 1988, were added by the prosecution. It appeares

that the complainant is the government official working with the

District Pnachayat as Agriculture Officer. As per the complaint

total 35,436 applications were examined and received form the

different Talukas of the Dahod District through the Gram Sevak.

After examination of the above said application, only 2719

farmers were found as correct beneficiary of the scheme and

32,717 applications were found bogus. Out of them 1191

persons were paid Rs. 2000/- each which comes to Rs.

23,82,000/- and they were wrongly benefited persons. However

they were not entitile to claim the amount under the said

scheme. As per the chargesheet filed by the investigation agency

charged under sections 406, 420 and 120B of IPC as well as

under section 66(d) of IT Act is levelled. Further it appears from

R/CR.MA/11042/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021

the chargesheet papers that the applicant was working as

Districrt Level Entrepreneur DLE - District Panchayat and

because of his position he had wrongfully got the digital user

ID, by which he directly submit an application, by passing one

stage of verification at the Taluka level. As per the affidavit

filed by the Investigating officer, during the course of

investigation it was revealed that by miusing the 3 master digital

user ID applicant had created bogus 78 user ID and the same

were given to the other accused persons by which various

applications were submitted, approved and ultimately those

persons have successful in getting the financial gain under the

scheme of PRADHANMANTRI KISAN SAMMAN NIDHI

YOJNA. It appears that all such bogus ID's had been utilised

and created by using the master key by the applicant. The list of

bogus user ID revealed from NIC is enclosed at Annexure R1.

In the chargesheet, applicant is shown as accused no. 1.

Primafacie, it appears that the applicant has played master role

in the entire offence, by using user ID, submitting and

providing to the other accused persons from which bogus

R/CR.MA/11042/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021

applications were processed. As per the report of In-charge

Deputy Police Comissioner, Dahod dated 27-09-2021, total

17,358 persons had applied for getting any benefit of the

scheme through online. However, they were not entitle to claim

for getting any benefit under the scheme and 16,553 persons got

amount of Rs. 2,000/- deposited in their account by way of three

installments. Total amount of missappropriation comes to Rs.

9,06,24,000/-. As per the report, present applicant has received

an amount of Rs. 7,70,000/- from the resepective applicants with

the connivance of other accused persons. The bonafide shown

by the present applicant by way of depositing an amount of Rs.

7,70,000/- before the District and Sessions court Dahod, cannot

be considered by this court. Considering the involvement of the

present applicant in the serious offecne of cheating and criminal

breach of trust, the basic requirement to bring home the

accusations under section of 405 of the code i.e. entrustment and

dishonest intention actutated by the applicant and

misappropriated it or converted it to his own use to the

detriment of the persons who entrusted are established.

R/CR.MA/11042/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 15/11/2021

Primafacie it is proved at this stage the dishonest intentions

from the very beginning of the said offence. Considering the

involvement in the offence and active participation and role

played by him in commission of the offence, this court is of the

considered view that the prayer made by the present applicant

cannot be considered as he is shown as accused no. 1 in the

charge-sheet. Hence present application is ordered to be

dismissed. Rule is discharged.

(B.N. KARIA, J) BEENA SHAH