Digamber Pujari vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 8761 MP

                                                                    1
                                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                              AT INDORE
                                                                   BEFORE
                                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                                             ON THE 1st OF JULY, 2022

                                                   MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 29201 of 2022

                                           Between:-
                                           DIGAMBER PUJARI S/O SHRI BHUJANGA
                                           PURARI   ,  AGED   ABOUT   66  YEARS,
                                           OCCUPATION: ADVOCATE AND NOTARY
                                           R/O: 23 SHYAM NAGAR MAIN, INDORE
                                           (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                                 .....APPLICANT
                                           (BY SHRI AJAY BAGADIA, SENIOR COUNSEL WITH SHRI
                                           GAJENDRA SINGH CHOUHAN ADV.)

                                           AND

                                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
                                           HOUSE OFFICER THROUGH POLICE ECONOMIC
                                           OFFENCE WING UNIT, INDORE (MADHYA
                                           PRADESH)

                                                                                            .....NON APPLICANT
                                           (BY SHRI YASH TIWARI, PL)

                                         This application coming on for orders this day, th e court passed the
                                   following:
                                                                     ORDER

Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He is in jail since 6.6.2022 in connection with Crime No.9/2019 registered at P.S. - Economic Offence Wing, Indore (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC.

Signature Not Verified SAN As per the prosecution story, the co-accused Gajendra S/o Shri

Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Jhummaklal Jain was the owner of land bearing Survey No.330/1 and 330/2, Date: 2022.07.01 18:52:06 IST

total Rakba 2.566 hectare, out of the said land an application for development of the colony on 1.215 hectare land was submitted to the Sub Divisional Officer, Sanwer. It is alleged that the said application was annexed with affidavit of the land owner Gajendra Jain but in place of signature of Gajendra Jain, his son/co-accused Girish Jain had signed the said affidavits. The said application was allowed by mortgaging 24 plots i.e. plot no.11-12, 22, 24, 27, 29 to 37, 46 and 53. It is also alleged that out of the aforesaid plots, the plot no.11 and 53 were illegally sold to Smt. Parvati Bai and Smt. Anita Bhadoriya by co-accused Gajendra Jain and Arun Singh Thakur. On the basis of the aforesaid, the present offence has been registered against 4 accused persons. It is further alleged that

the applicant without identifying the deponent (Gajendra Jain), illegally took the signatures of his son (Girish Jain) on the affidavits.

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. He is a practicing lawyer and since 1996 he is serving out as a Public Notary without any complaint. He has duly participated in the investigation. While registering the FIR, the provisions of Section 13(1) of the Notaries Act, 1952 has not been complied with. Applicant is never benefited by any money from the said transaction. He has not played any role, nor any document has been notarized by him regarding the mortgaged plot. Applicant is a 66 years old person and having several medical ailments like heart disease, thyroid, orthopedic. He is in custody since 6.6.2022. Investigation is over. Applicant is a permanent resident of Indore and there is no apprehension of his fleeing away from the court of justice. Hence, he prays that applicant be released on bail.

Signature Not Verified SAN

Per-contra, learned PL for respondent/State opposes the bail application Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH SAVNER

and prays for its rejection. He has also placed reliance upon the judgment dated Date: 2022.07.01 18:52:06 IST

9.3.2020 passed by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in Crl OP(MD) No.2669 of 2020 and Crl.M.P.(MD) Nos.1396 & 1399 of 2020.

Perused the case diary as well as the impugned order of the court below. Considered all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation and the fact that present applicant is a Public Notary, allegation against him is that he has attested a document in absence of the executor but he has not played any active role in the aforesaid offence and there is no allegation that he was benefited by any money from the said transaction. Section 13 of the Notaries Act, 1952 needs to be taken notice of, which reads as follows:-

"13. Cognizance of offence (1) No court shall take cognizance of any offence committed by a notary in the exercise or purported exercise of his functions under this Act save upon complaint in writing made by an officer authorized by the Central Government or a State Government by general or special order in this behalf.

(2) No Magistrate other than a Presidency Magistrate or a Magistrate of the First Class try an offence punishable under this Act."

Looking to the provisions of Section 13 of the Notaries Act, 1952, cognizance of any offence could be taken against the petitioner (Public Notary)

only on a complaint in writing made by an officer authorized by the Central Government or a State Government.

Admittedly, complaint, upon which cognizance has been taken against the Signature Not Verified SAN petitioner, has never been lodged by an officer authorized by the Central Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Government or the State Government.

Date: 2022.07.01 18:52:06 IST

Apart from the above, present applicant is a 66 years old person and he is suffering from various severe diseases, investigation is over and charge sheet has been filed, therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. Therefore, in view of the above, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail.

Accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (One Lakh) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by the conditions enumerated u/S. 437(3) Cr.P.C.

Before releasing the applicant from the custody, the Jail Authorities are directed to medically examine him in order to rule out the possibility of Covid- 19 infections and shall comply with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in W.P.No. 01/2020.

C.C. as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE trilok

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by TRILOK SINGH SAVNER Date: 2022.07.01 18:52:06 IST