Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vinod vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 17 January, 2022
Author: Satyendra Kumar Singh
1
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRA No. 411 of 2022
(VINOD Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
Indore, Dated : 17-01-2022
Shri Ashish Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Sachin Jaiswal, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/ State.
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Appeal is admitted for hearing.
Let record of the trial Court be called for.
Heard on I.A.No. 442/2022, an application for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail to appellant - Vinod Billoriya
The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 419, 420, 467, 468,
471 and 120-B of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years with fine of Rs.
2,000/- , R.I. for three years with fine of Rs.2,000/-, R.I. for four years with fine
of Rs. 2000/-, R.I. for three years with fine of Rs. 2,000/-, R.I. for three years with
fine of Rs. 2,000/- and further R.I. for three years with fine of Rs. 2,000/-
respectively with default stipulation vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated
21.12.2021 passed by Special Judge(Prevention of Corruption Act), Indore in case
No. SC EOW/46/2018.
Prosecution story in brief is that appellant and other co-accused persons
made a criminal conspiracy by preparing forged sale deed and obtained loan amount
from the bank causing financial loss to the bank. Co-accused Rajagram Kashyap
being President of Vishwas Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti Mariyadit executed and
registered the sale deed in favour of Girraj Gupta for Plot No. 186 Sanwariya Nagar,
Indore. Co-accused Sanjay Mathwal impersonated himself as Girraj Gupta and sold
the said plot through forged registered sale deed dated 10.08.2003 to co-accused
Pradeep Gupta who in connivance with co-accused Vijay Dhambak, Manager of State
Bank of India, Branch Scheme No. 54, A.B. Road, Indore took loan of Rs. 2,50,000/-
for purchase of said plot and Vinod Billoriya (present appellant) offered his a
guarantee in sanction of loan.
Learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant that was just a guarantor
in the loan taken by the co-accused person Pradeep Gupta who has not committed any
default in payment of monthly installments of the loan advanced to him and repaid
Signature Not Verified
the whole loan of Rs. 2,50,000/- on time. Hence, he has not committed any offence.
SAN
Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN
Date: 2022.01.18 10:28:26 IST
Appellant remained in custody from 09.03.2018 to 23.07.2018 i.e. for 137 days
during trial and thereafter from the date of passing of the judgment i.e. 21.12.2021.
In other identical matters accused persons have also been granted suspension of
sentence vide orders dated 03.01.2022. There is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in
near future. In view of aforesaid, learned counsel for the appellant prays for
suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of the bail to the appellant.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the prayer for
suspension of remaining jail sentence and submits that appellant was very well
involved in the conspiracy and despite knowing the fact that aforesaid housing loan
was being taken on the basis of forged documents, become guarantor for
advancement of loan to the co-accused person. Hence no case for grant of the bail to
the appellant.
Having considered the role of appellant in the crime and also considering the
period of custody, short term of sentence and considering other facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit case for
suspension of the sentence and grant of bail to the appellant. Hence, without
expressing any opinion on merits of the matter I.A.No. 210/2022 is allowed and jail
sentence of the appellant shall remain suspended.
I t is directed that subject to depositing the fine amount, if already not
deposited, he shall be released on bail, on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) along with a solvent surety in the like
amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his appearance before the Registry of
this Court firstly on 21.02.2022, and on such other dates, as may be fixed by the
Registry in this regard, till final disposal of this appeal.
I.A is allowed.
List the case in due course.
C.C. as per rules.
(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH)
JUDGE
sh
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by SEHAR HASEEN
Date: 2022.01.18 10:28:26 IST
