Mohit Gangil vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 1761 MP

                          1
          THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                   MCRC No.1707/2022
            (MOHIT GANGIL VS. STATE OF M.P.)

                     Through Video Conferencing

Gwalior, Dated : 08/02/2022

       Shri Raghvendra Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant.

       Shri C.P.Singh, learned counsel for the State.

       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 30/12/2021 in connection

with Crime No.200/2021 registered at Police Station Kotwali,

District Gwalior for offence under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC.

       It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the

applicant is the proprietor of M/s Bhagwati Sales. According to the

prosecution case, the complainant is the proprietor of Shiv

Enterprises and he had given Rs.17,00,000/- to the applicant for

supply of electronic items, but neither the electronic items were

supplied nor the amount was returned back. It is submitted that

according to the complainant, a cheque of Rs.5,00,000/- was given on

27/12/2019

and an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- was paid by RTGS on

03/01/2020 and it is further alleged that on 05/01/2020 an amount of

Rs.7,00,000/- was paid.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that it is correct

that there are commercial transactions between M/s Bhagwati Sales

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.1707/2022 (MOHIT GANGIL VS. STATE OF M.P.)

and M/s Shiv Enterprises. The applicant has filed a copy of ledger of

Shiv Enterprises to show that on 24/12/2019, an amount of

Rs.5,00,000/- was credited in the ledger account of Shiv Enterprises

and on 03/01/2020 another amount of Rs.5,00,000/- was also credited

in the ledger account of Shiv Enterprises. It is submitted that on

24/12/2019, a total amount of Rs.28,62,919.99/- was outstanding

against Shiv Enterprises and accordingly, cheque amount of

Rs.5,00,000/- was credited in the account and accordingly, on

24/12/2019, a total amount of Rs.23,62,919.99/- was outstanding.

Thereafter, on 03/01/2020 an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- was received

through RTGS and the same was also credited in the ledger account

of the complainant and accordingly, an amount of Rs.19,98,519.99/-

was outstanding against the complainant. However, the payment of

Rs.7,00,000/- in cash has been disputed by the applicant. It is further

submitted that even otherwise, it is a pure commercial transaction.

The applicant is ready and willing to abide by any stringent

condition, which may be imposed by this Court. The Trial is likely to

take sufficiently long time and there is no possibility of his

absconding or tampering with the prosecution case.

Per contra, the application is vehemently opposed by the

counsel for the State. It is submitted that so far as the ledger account

of the complainant is concerned, it is a matter of defence, which is

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.1707/2022 (MOHIT GANGIL VS. STATE OF M.P.)

required to be proved in the trial and the applicant had

misappropriated a huge amount of Rs.17,00,000/- in the name of

supplying electronic items.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The FIR discloses that the dispute relates to the commercial

transactions and according to the applicant, the cheque amount of

Rs.5,00,000/- as well as an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-, which was paid

by RTGS were credited to the ledger account of the complainant.

However, the ledger account is required to be proved by the applicant

before the Trial Court.

This Court is of the considered opinion that since, the entire

dispute is a commercial dispute, therefore, the applicant can be

granted bail on stringent condition. Accordingly, in case, if the

applicant deposits an amount of Rs.7,00,000/-, which shall be

kept in Fixed Deposit Receipt in Nationalized Bank liable to be

renewed from time to time and on furnishing a personal bond in the

sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac) with one surety in the like

amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court the

applicant shall be released on bail to appear before the Court on the

dates given by the concerned Court.

This order shall remain effective till the end of trial but in case

of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC No.1707/2022 (MOHIT GANGIL VS. STATE OF M.P.)

It is made clear that the amount of Rs.7,00,000/- shall not

be disbursed to anybody including the complainant and it shall

continue to remain in the FDR with periodical renewal till the

conclusion of trial. It is further directed that the FDR shall be

dealt with in accordance with the outcome of the trial.

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

the case of Aparna Bhat and others Vs. State of M.P. Passed on

18.03.2021 in Criminal Appeal No. 329/2021, the intimation

regarding grant of bail be sent to the complainant.

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

Certified copy as per rules.

                                                                   (G.S. Ahluwalia)
Pj'S/-                                                                   Judge
   PRINCEE
   BARAIYA
   2022.02.08
   17:04:50 +05'30'