Rahup Khan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5177 MP

                             1
           THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                    MCRC No.17755/2022
                 Rahup Khan vs. State of M.P.

Gwalior, Dated : 08/04/2022

      Shri Ravi Dwivedi, Counsel for the applicant.

      Smt. Anjali Gyanani, Counsel for respondent/State.

Shri R.S. Gurjar, Counsel for the complainant.

Case diary is available.

This first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed

for grant of bail.

The applicant has been arrested on 22.3.2022 in connection with

Crime No.389/2021 registered at Police Station Madhoganj, District

Gwalior for offence under Sections 406, 306, 34 of IPC.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that there is no

allegation against the applicant to the effect that he had given loan to

the deceased. Even if the allegations made against the applicant are

considered, then at the most, it can be said that the deceased was being

asked to refund the money and if he has committed suicide, then it

would not be an offence under Section 306 of IPC. To buttress his

contention, counsel for the applicant has relied upon by the judgment

passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Arnab Manoranjan

Goswami Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in (2021) 2

SCC 427 and the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Vivek

Kumar Jain and another Vs. State of MP and another reported in

2015 (1) MPHT 75.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.17755/2022 Rahup Khan vs. State of M.P.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

counsel for the State as well as the complainant. It is submitted by the

counsel for the State that the allegations against the applicant are that

he used to provide loan to the deceased from money lenders at an

exorbitant rate of interest. ATM card of the deceased was also taken

away by the applicant and an amount of Rs.80,000/- was withdrawn

from his account through ATM by the co-accused persons even after

the death of the deceased. The amount of Rs.8,75,000/- was

withdrawn by the deceased, but that was not found which must have

been taken away by the applicant or the co-accused persons. It is

further submitted that the amount from ATM card was withdrawn even

after the death of deceased.

Considering the role played by the applicant, no case is made

out for grant of bail. The application fails and is hereby dismissed.

(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Arun* ARUN KUMAR MISHRA 2022.04.08 19:00:03 +05'30'