Mukesh Kumar Singhal vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 16341 MP

                                                              1
                            IN     THE        HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                   AT JABALPUR
                                                          BEFORE
                                            HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
                                               ON THE 9 th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                                            MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 52221 of 2022

                           BETWEEN:-
                           MUKESH KUMAR SINGHAL S/O SHRI BASANT KUMAR
                           SINGHAL, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O NEAR RAM
                           J A N K I M A N D I R JIWAJIGAN J MORENA (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                               .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI MANISH DATT - SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI NEERAJ SHAH
                           - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           UNION OF INDIA THROUGH CEN TR AL BUREAU OF
                           INVESTIGATION C.B.I ACB BHOPAL (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                             .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI PANKAJ DUBEY - ADVOCATE)

                                 This application coming on for admission this day, th e Court passed
                           the following:
                                                               ORDER

This is second bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of applicant. His earlier bail application was dismissed on merit vide order dated 04.07.2022 passed in M.Cr.C.No.19874 of 2022. Thereafter, the present application has been filed after a lapse of 5-6 months.

Applicant is in custody since 30.03.2022 in connection with Crime No.RC0082019A0009 registered at Police Station - CBI, ACB Bhopal, District Bhopal (M.P.) for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B read with Section 407, 420 & 201 of Indian Penal Code and Section 13(1)(d) read with Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 12/12/2022 11:37:14 AM

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

It is argued that there is no connection of the present applicant with commission of offence as no transaction has taken place in his account. Other co-accused have already been enlarged on bail by this Court and only the present applicant remains to be under custody. He has placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 wherein it is held that during entire period of investigation, which appears to have been spread over last seven months, the appellant was not arrested by the investigation officer. In the present case also, the applicant has has been arrested only at the time of filing

of the charge-sheet. He has cooperated in the investigation and appeared before the authorities on several occasions. A similar benefit be extended to him. He has further placed reliance upon a judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. Through Director, Criminal Appeal No.929 of 2021 dated 02.09.2021, wherein considering the similar analogy the appeal was allowed. It is further argued that an amount of Rs.6.00 crores has already been deposited by the applicant, which amounts to 50% of the total embezzled amount. He is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court while considering the bail application. On these grounds, he has prayed for grant of bail.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent opposed the application for bail stating that no new is available to the applicant after rejection of the earlier application on merits. The Court while considering the earlier application has dealt in detail with the facts and circumstances of the case. The allegation against the applicant is that he issued forged warehouse receipts

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 12/12/2022 11:37:14 AM

which were beyond the capacity of the warehouse. The total capacity of the warehouses was 4965 metric tons, whereas the warehouse receipts to the tune of 11630 metric tons have been issued, which more than double of the capacity of the warehouse and thereafter the entire fraud has taken place. The same has been done only to misappropriate the funds. Under these circumstances, no case for grant of bail is made out as no new ground is arising in the matter.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not deem it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on bail at this stage.

The application is accordingly rejected.

(VISHAL MISHRA) JUDGE sj

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHEEL KUMAR JHARIYA Signing time: 12/12/2022 11:37:14 AM