Bharat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 21 MP

                                                             1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
                                                ON THE 2 nd OF JANUARY, 2023
                                         MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 58902 of 2022

                           BETWEEN:-
                           BHARAT S/O SHRI LAXMINARAYAN SHARMA, AGED
                           ABOUT     36    YEARS, OCCUPATION:  BUSINESS
                           KALYANPURA, TEH. JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                          .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI OMPRAKASH SOLANKI - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATION HOUSE
                           OFFICER THROUGH POLICE STATION KALYANPURA
                           DISTRICT JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT
                           (BY SHRI HEMANT SHARMA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
                           (SHRI PEYUSH JAIN - ADVOCATE FOR THE OBJECTOR)


                                 This application coming on for hearing this day, the 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 26.11.2022 in connection with Crime No. 363/2022 registered at P.S. - Kalyanpura District Jhabua (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC.

As per the prosecution story, on 8.10.2022, complainant Rajkumari has lodged a report by stating that she had executed a registered lease deed of the land in question in favour of present applicant Bharat Sharma for 16 years and Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 03-01-2023 11:30:19

Bharat has further executed a sub-lease in favour of Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL). She further alleged that she has only allowed lease to applicant Bharat for 16 years but he has sub-leased the land to HPCL for 29 years and 11 months instead of 16 years as executed and agreed between her and applicant. Accordingly a case has been registered against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. Applicant is in jail since 26.11.2022. Statement of complainant was recorded by Tehsildar and she has stated that she has given the diverted land for the period of 29 years on lease to

applicant, there is no necessity of permission under section 165(6) of MP Land Revenue Code. Rajkumari had executed a registered lease deed of 1225 sq.mt. of land in favour of present applicant for 16 years and after 16 years, the complainant will agree for further lease period of 15 years. HPCL also executed an agreement with applicant on 31.3.2011 and thereafter sub lease was executed between applicant and HPCL on the basis of registered sale deed dated 13.6.2011. The complainant has lodged a false FIR under section 307 of IPC against him but later on he was acquitted vide judgment dated 29.4.2022 passed by Special Judge. He has filed WP No. 3267/2017 before this Court for challenging termination of dealership agreement but same is pending for adjudication. Rajkumari has also filed WP No. 3381/2017 regarding her grievance and same was disposed off by this court vide order dated 5.7.2019 with liberty to file a civil suit. Rajkumari has continuously created dispute regarding execution of lease deed, therefore, complainant and applicant mutually agreed to terminate the disputed lease deed vide registered document dated

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 03-01-2023 11:30:19

10.11.2021. Rajkumari is regularly receiving lease amount through bank transaction till date. No offence under section 467 of IPC is made out against the applicant. Hence, he prays that applicant be released on bail.

Per-contra, learned PL for respondent/State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection.

Perused the case diary as well as the impugned order of the court below. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by counsel for the parties, nature and gravity of allegation it is noticed that as per registered lease deed dated 23.3.2011 executed by complainant Rajkumari in favour of applicant it appears that period of lease is 16 years but present applicant has executed a sub-lease in favour of HPCL for a period of 29 years and 11 months instead of 16 years, the said lease agreement was not executed by complainant Rajkumari, as per lease termination deed, it is also admitted by applicant in the aforesaid document that period of lease was only 16 years, other five co-accused persons are still absconding. In view of the evidence available on record, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Hence this first bail application filed by applicant under section 439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE BDJ

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUVNESHWAR DATT JOSHI Signing time: 03-01-2023 11:30:19