Ashish Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 6774 MP

  HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

                         M.Cr.C. No.42456/2021
               (Ashish Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)
                                                                        -1-
Indore, dated 25/10/2021
       Shri Prateek Maheshwari, learned counsel for the applicant.
       Shri   Prateek   Patwardhan,   learned   panel   lawyer    for     the
respondent/Stated.

Shri Aditya Raj Singh Solanki, learned counsel for the objector. This first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.469/2021 registered at police station- Kanadia, District-Indore for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC.

02. As per the prosecution story, present applicant is working as Chief Engineer at State Bank of India. The applicant is son-in-law of the complainant- Ravindra Kumar Jain. On 06.11.2017, the applicant's first wife, who was daughter of Ravindra Kumar Jain, passed away due to cardiac arrest. The complainant had given a written complaint before the Superintendent of Police, Indore to the effect that in the year 2018, the applicant told him that he is willing to purchase some property in Indore and for that purpose he is applying for loan from the Bank and he requires registered guarantee from him. On this pretext, the applicant took him to the Registrar office and he fraudulently obtained complainant's signatures on blank papers and later on, by using his signatures on blank paper, present applicant prepared forged registered sale-deed of the plot on his name. The complainant never sold plot No.11, Sector - C, Vaibhav Nagar, Extension, Indore to the applicant for consideration of Rs.36,31,500/-. The applicant did not pay any money to him as consideration of alleged sale. To act upon the written complaint, Additional S.P., Indore made an inquiry and on the basis of the said HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

M.Cr.C. No.42456/2021 (Ashish Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

inquiry, offence has been registered against the present applicant.

03. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the applicant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this crime. In the year 2018, the complainant was in need of funds and proposed the applicant to purchase plot No.11 at Baibhav Nagar Extension, Indore which led to execution of agreement to sale dated 17.05.2018 for the impugned property between the applicant and complainant for total consideration of Rs.36,31,500/- and earnest money of Rs.11,000/- was paid in cash. In order to purchase the property, the applicant availed a property loan from the Bank and after its approval, registered sale-deed was executed before the Registrar on 06.06.2018 wherein brother-in-law (Vinay Jain) was also stood as witness. The applicant paid Rs.14,81,500/- via Cheque and Rs.21,50,000/- via Banker's Cheque and he is paying EMI against the loan amount. Then, applicant made humble request to get chain documents but complainant was trying to defer and never handover the chain documents to the applicant. Thereafter, the applicant filed a civil suit against the complainant, which is pending before the Court of Civil Judge at Indore being RCS-A/449/2019. The complainant is trying to sell the impugned property at an escalated price to a third person. The complainant filed so many complaints before the police department and after inquiry, all the complaints have been found false and incorrect. To create undue pressure and to secure favorable settlement, complainant has lodged a complaint against him. Complainant is serving as Chief Manager at State Bank of India. He is permanent resident of district-Indore.

04. Learned counsel for the applicant also placed reliance upon judgments delivered in the cases of Vishnu Shastri and others Vs. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

M.Cr.C. No.42456/2021 (Ashish Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

Deepak Surayavanshi and ors., ILR (2016) MP 3158; Shivaji Yallappa Patil Vs. Ranajeet Appasaheb Patil (AIR 2018 SC 1961); Dalip Kaur and others Vs. Jagnar Singh and others, (Cr.A. No.1135/2009) decided on 07.07.2019; Vidhyadhar Vs. Manikrao and others (C.A. No.1534/1999) decided on 17.03.1999 and Dahiben Vs. Arvindbhai Kalyanji Bhanusali and others, (Civil Appeal No.9519/2019) decided on 09.07.2020. Hence, he prays that application for grant of anticipatory bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.

04. Per-contra, learned PL for the respondent /State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection.

05. Learned counsel for the objector also opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that no sufficient ground is made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

06. Perused the case-diary and impugned order of the trial court as well as the other documents filed by both the parties.

07. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and nature and gravity of the allegation and also taking note of the fact that after inquiry made by the Additional S.P., offence has been registered against the present applicant and civil suit is also pending before civil court at Indore, although, in the alleged sale-deed, fact is mentioned that the applicant has paid entire amount of Rs.36,31,500/- to the complainant- Ravindra Kumar Jain but, allegedly nothing has been paid to the complainant. The applicant has contended that he has paid consideration of Rs.14,81,500/- via Cheque (Annexure P-5) and via Banker's Cheque of Rs.21,50,000/- (Annexure P-6). As per letter dated 17.04.2019 of State Bank of India, Indore, the applicant was informed by the Bank that he HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT INDORE

M.Cr.C. No.42456/2021 (Ashish Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh)

has not collected the banker's cheque of Rs.21,50,000/- from his office and not delivered the chain documents to the bank. In this matter, investigation is already pending.

08. In view of the above, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that all the citations filed by the present applicant are related with the final adjudication of the civil suit, therefore, all the the citations are not applicable at this stage, hence, the applicant does not deserve for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, present bail application filed under section 438 of Cr.P.C is hereby dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.

(Anil Verma) Judge N.R.

Digitally signed by NARENDRA KUMAR RAIPURIA Date: 2021.10.26 19:08:14 +05'30'