Madhya Pradesh High Court
Muneem Khan vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 22 December, 2023
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
CRA No. 14873 of 2023
(MUNEEM KHAN Vs CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION)
Dated : 22-12-2023
Shri Abhishek Parashar, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Susheel Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the respondent/CBI.
Heard on IA.22132/2023, first application under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C.
for suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of sole appellant-
Muneem Khan.
Appellant-Muneem Khan stood convicted under Sections 120-B, Section
419 read with Section 120-B, Section 420 r/w Section 120-B of IPC, Section
467 read with Section 120-B, Section 468 read with Section 120-B, u/s. 471 r/w
Section 120-B of IPC and u/s. 3 (d) (1) (2)/4 MPRE Act r/w Section 120-B of
IPC and sentenced to undergo Three Years RI with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, Three
Years RI with a fine of Rs.1,000/-, Four Years RI with a fine of Rs.1,000/-,
four Years RI with a fine of Rs.5,000/- three Years RI with a fine of Rs.1,000/-
, four years RI, with a fine of Rs.5,000/- and one year RI with a find of Rs.
100/-, respectively, with default stipulations vide judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 24.11.2023 passed by Special Judge (CBI) and XII
Additional Sessions Judge, District Gwalior (M.P.) in S.C.(CBI) No.18/2017.
Appellant so far has suffered incarceration of two months and 11 days.
A s per prosecution story, letter No.665/2013 dated 14/08/13 & letter
No.665A/2013 were received at Police Station Dehat from Additional I.G.
Selection, PHQ & the superintendent of Police, Bhind respectively. Thereafter,
investigation was started and during investigation, it is found that present
appellant Muneem Khan appeared in the year 2012 (Roll No.272941) in Written
Test for Constable Selection Exam Conducted by Vyapam and got selection.
After taking the signature, thumb impression of the accused, the same were
matched with their signature as well as thumb impression but the same were not
matched. Thus, it is found prima facie that the person who is performing duty
and the person who had appeared in the Constable Selection Exam 2012 were
different persons, and another person was appeared in the exam over Roll
No.212941 passed the same and succeed to get service over the post of
Constable. The Special Court upon due appreciation of the evidence placed on
record convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is
innocent and has falsely been roped in the present case. There are
contradictions in the statements of witnesses. Present appellant has been
convicted on account of the allegation that in the examination which was being
conducted to select Constable, he got appeared co-accused Satendra Jat in his
own place. Appellant has no criminal antecedents. It is submitted that appellant
is a youth and if he is forced to remain in custody then that will spoil his career.
Conclusion of the appeal is likely to take time. On these grounds, learned
counsel for the appellant submits that he will abide by all the terms and
conditions as may be imposed and accordingly prays that the appellant may be
extended the benefit of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/CBI
opposed the application while supporting the impugned judgment of conviction
and order of sentence with submission that the present appellant got appeared
co-accused Satendra Jat in his own place in the examination for selection of
Constable and thus he is not entitled to receive the benefit of suspension of
sentence and grant of bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the rival parties, without commenting
upon the contentions so advanced touching the merits of the case, in the
obtaining facts and circumstances, jail sentence of the appellant Muneem Khan
deserves to be suspended during pendency of the present appeal.
Accordingly, it is directed that the jail sentence of appellant-Muneem
Khan shall remain suspended during pendency of the present appeal and he
shall be released on bail subject to verification of the factum of depositing the
fine amount and on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.3,00,000/-
(Rupees Three Lac only) with two solvent sureties of Rs.1,50,000/- each (one
of which should be local) to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
The appellant shall mark his attendance before concerned Police Station
on first Saturday of each and every month.
He is also directed to appear before the Registry of this Court first on
21/02/2024 and on other subsequent dates as may be fixed in this behalf with
following further conditions:-
Accordingly, IA.22132/2023 stands allowed and closed.
Observations on facts, if any, are only for the purpose of deciding the
instant I.A. and shall have no bearing on the merits of the appeal.
(ROHIT ARYA) (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
JUDGE JUDGE
ar
ABDUR RAHMAN
2023.12.22
18:14:24 +05'30'
