Santosh Malviya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 166 MP

                                    1                      MCrC No.5452/2021



      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR

                         MCrC No.5452/2021
       (Santoh Malviya & others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)
Jabalpur, dated : 24.02.2021.

      Shri Abhinav Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioners.
      Shri Yogesh Mishra, learned Panel Lawyer for the State.
      Shri Neeraj Jain, learned counsel for the Objector.
                                 ORDER

Crime No. Under Section Police Station Arrest Date 29/2021 384, 294, 506, 34 of Babai, District 18.01.2021.

IPC and Section 3 and Hoshangabad 4 of Madhya Pradesh Riniyo Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam.

As declared by the petitioner, this is the first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.

2. As per the case of the prosecution, the complainant had borrowed Rs.20000/- from the accused Santosh Malviya on 10.10.2020. According to his claim, he repaid the amount Rs.40,000/- just after 10 days i.e. on 20.10.2020 but even then Santosh Malviya demanded more money that is to say Rs.75,000/- on account of interest.

3. It is alleged that on 29.12.2020 at about 8:00 in the night, Santosh alongwith his son Ranjeet @ Pappu and accompanied with Golu @ Devendra and Sethu @ Govind had come to his home and insisted upon his demand for Rs.75000/-. On refusal of the claim that money has already been repaid, accused persons hurled abuses and asked him to execute the sale deed of his land in lieu of the amount due towards

him. Even statement of the complainant that he will lodge the report with the police did not restrain them from threatening him but after sometime they left the place under the threat of life. The complainant approached the police and lodged the FIR.

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that there is no proof that the complainant, who had admittedly borrowed the money from the petitioner-Santosh had repaid the same. The allegation against the petitioner Santosh, at the most is to the demand of the money credited by him. All the petitioners are languishing in jail since 18.01.2021 with no criminal antecedents, Therefore, they be enlarged on bail.

5. The objection of the State as well as the objector is that earlier one other crime bearing crime number 226/2014 under Sections 147, 142, 353, 332, 186, 427 and 506 of IPC has been registered against all the three petitioners and crime number 07/2021 under Section 384, 506 and 341 of IPC has also been registered against petitioner No.1 and 2.

6. In reply, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that crime number 07/2021 has been registered on the instigation of the complainant in this case. He had lodged a similar FIR and when the petitioner got bail in that case and came out of the jail, he again lodged the present FIR. It shows the malafide of the complainant that he want to keep the petitioner in jail. With regard to crime number 226/2014, it is submitted that the trial has been concluded and statement of the accused has been recorded and the case was posted for the judgment but the judgment could not be passed due to COVID 19 lockdown.

7. On due consideration of the nature of accusation made against the petitioners; the evidence available on record and other facts and

circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed.

8. It is directed that the petitioner Santosh Malviya, Ranjit Malviya and Devendra Malviya be released from custody on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) each with one solvent surety each to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance before the Trial Court as and when required further subject to the following conditions :-

(i) The petitioners shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments on frivolous grounds to protract the trial.;

(ii) The petitioners shall not directly or indirectly allure or make any inducement, threat or promise to the prosecution witnesses, so as to dissuade him from disclosing truth before the Court;

(iii) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or involve in any criminal activity;

(iv) In case of his involvement in any other criminal activity or breach of any other aforesaid conditions, the bail granted in this case may also be cancelled.

(VIRENDER SINGH) JUDGE

anand Digitally signed by ANAND KRISHNA SEN Date: 2021.02.26 15:50:28 +05'30'