Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sohrab Patel vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 8 March, 2022
Author: Rajendra Kumar (Verma)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
ON THE 8th OF MARCH, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 59204 of 2021
Between:-
1. SOHRAB PATEL S/O LATE SHRI AALAM PATEL ,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURE GRAM KHAJRANA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ISLAM PATEL S/O LATE SHRI AALAM PATEL ,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
AGRICULTURIST GRAM KHAJRANA, KHAJRANA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI TOUSIF WARSI, ADVOCATE )
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION
HOUSE OFFICER THR. P.S. KHAJRANA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI S.S. THAKUR, GA FOR THE STATE )
This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
T his is FIRST application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of
anticipatory bail filed on behalf of applicants who are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Crime No.1032/2021 registered at Police Station Khajrana, District
Indore for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of IPC.
As per the prosecution, According to the prosecution case, on 18.10.2021,
the police has registered a criminal case against the accused persons persons
namely Jakir Patel, Dilip Sisodiya, (Chairman of Trishla Grah Nirman Sehkari
Sanstha Maryadit), Dilavar, Sohrab, and Islam on the basis of a letter dated
18.10.2021 issued by Nayab Tehsildar, Juni Indore by which he has directed to
register the case against the accused persons for committing fraud with regard to
the land situated at Survey Nos.172/1, 172/2, 173/3, 174/3 and 173/2 at village
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN AMIT KUMAR
Date: 2022.03.11
15:46:37 IST
Khajrana alleging that the accused persons have committed fraud with the Nyay
Nagar Karmchari Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha Maryadit, Indore. Regarding the
land in question, an agreement was executed in favour of Nyay Nagar Karmchari
Grah Nirman Sehkari Sanstha Maryadit, Indore, but the accused persons have
executed another agreement and sold the land to Trishla Grah Nirman Sehkari
Sanstha Maryadit illegally and committed fraud of approximately 85,00,000/-.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant are innocent and
have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that it is undisputed
that the agreement to sale dated 05.08.1998, the applicants have sold their land to
Nyay Vibhag Karmchari Grah Nirman Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Indore and as per
the said agreement, the sale deed was executed within one year. The society has
failed to pay the amount as per the agreement. It is also further submitted that after
lapse of 8 years, the applicants entered into another sale agreement with another
society namely Trishala Grah Nirman Sanstha in the year 2007. The dispute
between the parties is of civil nature and the prosecution has implicated the
applicants falsely by giving color of criminal case. Nyay Vibhag Karmchari Grah
Nirman Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Indore neither filed any civil suit for specific
performance and after 22 years, harassing the applicants by converting civil dispute
into a criminal case. The applicants have not committed any forgery as the order
pertaining to the declaration of the land falling under the provision of the Urban
Land Ceiling Act. There is no question of influencing the witnesses in the present
case and the applicants shall co-operate in the investigation. On the aforesaid
grounds, prayer is made to release the applicants on anticipatory bail.
Counsel for the applicants further placed reliance over a judgment passed by
the Apex Court in the case of Saeed Yaseer Ibrahim vs. Stateof U.P. passed in
Criminal Appeal No.295/2022 on 28.02.2022 where it has been held that the civil
dispute could not be given a colour of criminal wrong doing.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the application and prayed for its
rejection by submitting that the applicants alongwith the other co-accused persons
have committed fraud with various complainants. Hence, the applicants are not
entitled for any relief from this Court in view of the seriousness of the offecne.
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN AMIT KUMAR
Date: 2022.03.11
I have heard the counsel for the parties and have perused the record.
15:46:37 IST
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in their entirety
particularly the facts as pointed out by learned counsel for the applicants, in the
opinion of this Court, the applicants are deserve to be released on bail.
Consequently, this first application for bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. filed
on behalf of the applicants is allowed.
It is directed that in the event of thier arrest, the applicants be released on
anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
(Rupees One Lac only) each with separate solvent sureties in the same amount to
the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer for their appearance before the trial Court
on all dates and for complying with the conditions enumerated in sub-Section (2)
of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
T h e applicants shall appear before the concerned Investigating
Officer as and when required and shall co-operate in the investigation of the
matter.
Following conditions are also stipulated;
(i) the applicants shall mark their presence before the Investigating
officer, as and when required;
(ii) the applicants shall co-operate with the investigation;
(iii) the applicants shall not influence the witnesses, in any case;
(iv) in case of failure of any of the above conditions, this bail order
shall stands canceled automatically without further reference to this Court.
C.C. as per rules.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA))
JUDGE
amit
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN AMIT KUMAR
Date: 2022.03.11
15:46:37 IST
