Pran Singh Lodhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1540 MP

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.5067/2022 (PRAN SINGH LODHI VS. STATE OF M.P.)

Through Video Conferencing

Gwalior, Dated : 03/02/2022

Shri Irshad Shah, learned counsel for the applicant.

Shri A.K.Nirankari, learned counsel for the State.

Case diary is available.

This first application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. has been

filed for grant of anticipatory bail.

The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime

No.150/2021 registered at Police Station Basai, District Datia for

offence under Sections 34(2) and 49-A of M.P. Excise Act.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the

applicant has been falsely implicated. He is the resident of village

Manguli, District Shivpuri, which is evident from his Aadhar Card as

well as Voter list of Khaniyadhana. On the date of incident, the

applicant was getting a machine repaired, which is being looked after

by him and this fact has been verified by Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat

Garetha, Janpad Panchayat Khaniyadhana, District Shivpuri. Original

certificate issued by Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Garetha, Janpad

Panchayat Khaniyadhana, District Shivpuri has also been placed on

record at page No.13.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

counsel for the State. It is submitted that according to the prosecution

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.5067/2022 (PRAN SINGH LODHI VS. STATE OF M.P.)

case, the police received an information that the applicant and one

Salikram are packing illegal country made liquor and accordingly,

when the police went to the house of co-accused Salikram, then it

was noticed that the applicant and co-accused Salikram were packing

the illicit liquor in quarters. The moment arrival of the police was

noticed by them, they ran away in the adjoining forest area. The

premises was checked and two drums each containing 200 liters of

OP worth Rs.4,80,000/-, four containers each containing 50 liters of

OP worth Rs.2,40,000/- and two plastic containers, each containing

100 quarters of country made liquor, one liquor packing machine

worth Rs.20,000/- empty quarters 200 bottle capes and one apparatus

for measuring the liquor were also seized. It is submitted that in all

600 liters of OP liquor was seized alongwith the packing material as

well as 200 quarters of country made liquor were seized. It is

submitted that OP liquor is a concentrated form of liquor from which

country made liquor is prepared after diluting the same.

So far as the submission made by the counsel for the applicant

that he is the resident of Manguli and not village Ladyiyapurwa

Madwa is concerned, then it is submitted that under Article 19 of the

Constitution of India everyone has free access to every part of the

country and if the applicant was involved in doing illegal work in

village Ladyiyapurwa Madwa, then it cannot be said that being the

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.5067/2022 (PRAN SINGH LODHI VS. STATE OF M.P.)

permanent resident of Manguli, he cannot go to place of incident.

So far as the certificate given by Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat

Garetha, Janpad Panchayat Khaniyadhana, District Shivpuri is

concerned, it is submitted that it is merely mentioned in the

certificate that the applicant was getting a machine repaired. The

details of the machine have not been given.

In response to the submission made by the counsel for the

State, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that in fact the

applicant is the owner of Sawmill and he was getting his Sawmill

repaired.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The applicant has not filed any document to show that he is the

owner of Sawmill. He has also not filed any document to show that

he has license under the M.P. Kashtha Chiran (Viniyaman)

Adhiniyam, 1984. He has also not filed any document to show that

what repair work was being carried out in Sawmill. Thus, it appears

that the certificate issued by Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Garetha,

Janpad Panchayat Khaniyadhana, District Shivpuri is false even to

his knowledge. It appears to be a clear case to create a false evidence

document so that it can be used in a judicial proceeding. In fact the

applicant has used the said document by filing the same before the

Court.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.5067/2022 (PRAN SINGH LODHI VS. STATE OF M.P.)

Looking to the huge quantity of OP liquor as well as packing

material, coupled with the fact that after noticing the police party, the

applicant had ran away from the spot as well as in the light of the

provisions of Section 59-A of M.P. Excise Act, no case is made out

for grant of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.

The Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri is directed to conduct

an enquiry as to whether the applicant is the owner of any Sawmill or

not. He would also conduct an enquiry as to whether he is having any

license under the M.P. Kashtha Chiran (Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 1984

to run the Sawmill or not.

In case, if it is found that the applicant is not the owner of any

Sawmill, then the offence shall also be registered against Sarpanch,

Gram Panchayat Garetha, Janpad Panchayat Khaniyadhana, District

Shivpuri for issuing a false document for utilization of the same in a

judicial proceeding.

At this stage, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicant

that if the Court is of the view that a false document has been placed

before the Court, then only remedy is to file a complaint.

Considered the submissions.

It is not a case where the document has been manipulated

while it is in custodia legis.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.5067/2022 (PRAN SINGH LODHI VS. STATE OF M.P.)

If, it is found in the enquiry that a false document has been

filed, then it is clear that a false document was created outside the

Court.

In the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the

case of Iqbal Singh Marwah and Another Vs. Meenakshi Marwah

and Another reported in (2005) 4 SCC 370, it is clear that if a

document is concocted outside the Court, then the bar as contained

under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. would not be applicable and the FIR can

be lodged.

Let the enquiry be conducted and completed within a period of

two months from today and the Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri

shall submit its report to the Principal Registrar of this Court latest

by 05/04/2022.

Let a typed copy of this order be supplied to Shri

A.K.Nirankari, Advocate for communicating the same to the

Superintendent of Police, Shivpuri for necessary information and

compliance.

                                                                  (G.S. Ahluwalia)
Pj'S/-                                                                  Judge

         Digitally signed by
         PRINCEE BARAIYA
         Date: 2022.02.03
         18:00:00 -08'00'