Anurag Singh Chouhan vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 14986 MP

                                                               1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                      AT INDORE
                                                       CRR No. 3662 of 2022
                                    (ANURAG SINGH CHOUHAN Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                           Dated : 16-11-2022
                                  Ms Sangeeta Parsai, learned counsel for the petitioner.

                                  Shri Kapil Mahant, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State.

Shri Siddharth Jain, learned counsel for the objector. Heard on I.A.No.12840/2022, an application u/S 397(1) of Cr.P.C. for suspension of jail sentence of the petitioner - Anurag Singh Chouhan.

Petitioner has been convicted by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge,

District Dhar vide judgment 15.06.2022 passed in Cr.A. No. 31/2021, maintaining the judgment of JMFC District Dhar passed in Cr.Case No. 876/2018 for commission of the offence punishable under Sections 420 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo 07 years of RI with fine of Rs.1,00,000/- with default stipulation.

Prosecution case in brief is that in the year 2012, petitioner alongwith co- accused Preeti Goyal and Sanjay Goyal and others induced and instigated the complainant Dheeraj and several other ID holders by conducting a meeting with them in which co-accused told them that company namely Prithvi Utility

Services Pvt. Ltd. was running online advertising business and under the said false pretext invited them to take franchise of their company by purchasing ID's. Each ID cost Rs. 13,500/- through which by making online clicks, they will earn Rs. 3,000/- per month. Complainant alongwith his family members have purchased around 100 ID's and other persons have purchased around 2,500 IDs for which they have been provided user ID and passwords by the petitioners. In the initial 2-3 months, complainant received money. However Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 11/18/2022 11:15:14 AM

others ID holders worked only for a month and about 10 ID holders have not been paid the amount so promised whereafter ID's of all the ID holders have been closed. All of them contacted the local office where petitioner told them that some inquiry of income tax department is going on and their amount due will be paid within 2-3 days. Later on, it has been informed that there was a blast in the head office at Baroda due to which certain computer got damaged. Faced with the said situation, complainant and other ID holders ran from pillar to post to contact Anurag Singh who was the Director of the said company who met them and gave two cheques of Rs. 1,80,19,800/- and another one of Rs. 2,77,000/-and when these two cheques were presented in the bank, the

same got bounced due to insufficient balance in the account. Under this false pretext, petitioner alongwith other co-accused persons fraudulently taken amount to the tune of Rs. 3 to 4 crores from the complainant as well as other persons thereby misappropriating their hard earned money.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial court as well as first appellate Court has committed error in holding the petitioner guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 420 of IPC. She further submits that it is apparent from the evidence produced on record that aforesaid company was registered company and initially paid the amount as agreed by the petitioner and co-accused persons to the ID holders. Thereafter, a blast took place in the head office at Baroda due to which their computers were damaged and they could not paid the amount as agreed by them. Hence, they have not committed cheating with the ID holders and the offence punishable u/S 420 of IPC do not attract in the matter. Even otherwise, petitioner has suffered more than 5 years o f incarceration out of 07 years sentence awarded. She further submits that learned trial Court has recorded the finding while convicting and sentencing the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 11/18/2022 11:15:14 AM

petitioner for 07 years imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Learned Appellate Court while confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court also directed the petitioner to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 60,00,000/- which is not in accordance as per sub-clause (3) of Section 357 of Cr.P.C. which reads as follows:

357. Order to pay compensation.

(1) When a Court imposes a sentence of fine or a sentence (including a sentence of death) of which fine forms a part, the Court may, when passing judgment, order the whole or any part of the fine recovered to be applied-

(a).......

(b).......

(c).......

(d) ......

(2) ........

(3) When a Court imposes a sentence, of which fine does not form a part, the Court may, when passing judgment, order the accused person to pay, by way of compensation, such amount as may be specified in the order to the person who has suffered any loss or injury by reason of the act for which the accused person has been so sentenced.

She further submits that in the instant case, fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- was already imposed as a part of sentence awarded by the trial Court vide impugned judgment. Therefore, in view of sub-clause (3) of Sec 357 of Cr.P.C., compensation awarded by the Appellate Court is not sustainable.

It is also submitted that there is no likelihood of final conclusion of this revision/petition in near future. Hence, it is prayed that application for suspension of jail sentence filed on behalf of the petitioner be allowed.

P er contra, learned counsel for respondent/State as well as learned counsel for the objector have opposed the prayer with the submission that petitioner alongwith other co-accused persons have committed cheating with complainant and other ID holders. They have taken crores of money from innocent people under the garb of false promises of return of money and

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 11/18/2022 11:15:14 AM

thereafter closed the company putting the ID holders in huge loss. Cheques given by them also got dishonoured. Neither their principal amount has been refunded nor they got amount so promised by purchasing the ID's. Under such circumstances, no case for grant of suspension is made out.

Having considering the rival submissions, the material pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner, especially with regard to the period of custody i.e. 5 year which is more than 50% out of total sentence awarded of 07 years, so also the fact that there is no likelihood of conclusion of final hearing of this revision in near future , without commenting on merits of the case application for suspension of jail sentence of the petitioners is allowed. The issue with regard to sustainability of the order passed by the Appellate Court with regard to award of compensation alongwith fine amount will be considered at the time of final hearing.

It is directed that execution of jail sentence of the petitioner shall remain suspended during pendency of this revision subject to his depositing fine amount, if not already deposited and also subject to furnishing separate surety of compensation amount of Rs.60,00,000/- and he be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Registry of this Court on 13.12.2022 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf.

Accordingly, the I.A. No.12840/2022 stands disposed of. List for admission.

C.c. as per rules.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 11/18/2022 11:15:14 AM

(SATYENDRA KUMAR SINGH) JUDGE sh

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SEHAR HASEEN Signing time: 11/18/2022 11:15:14 AM