Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt Farida Begum Biswas vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 29 April, 2025
Author: Anil Verma
Bench: Anil Verma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:9446
1 MCRC-16928-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA
ON THE 29th OF APRIL, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 16928 of 2025
SMT FARIDA BEGUM BISWAS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Mahendra Chaudhary and Shri Atithi Kumar - Advocate for the
applicant.
Shri A. P. S. Tomar - PP for State.
Shri Devendra Kumar Sharma- Advocate for complainant.
ORDER
This is the first application under Section 482 of the BNSS for grant of
anticipatory bail to the applicant.
Applicant apprehends her arrest in connection with Crime
No.149/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Bhind for the
offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409 and 34 of IPC.
Brief facts of the prosecution story are that the applicant is a co-
proprietor of Casket Realcon LLP which is a business entity. On 12.03.2021,
the complainant sold 252.10 quintals of mustard seeds for a consideration of
Rs.13,49,996. On the same day, an additional 252.20 quintals of mustard
seeds were sold amounting to Rs.13,50,531/-. The total sale transaction is of
Rs.27,00,527/-. Out of this aforesaid amount, Rs.10,00,000/- was paid to the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:9446
2 MCRC-16928-2025
complainant and there was an outstanding payment of Rs.17,00,527. But,
despite repeated demands, the applicant and Varik Vishwas have not paid the
outstanding amount. Therefore, they committed fraud with the complainant
and breached the trust of complainant. Accordingly, offence has been
registered.
Learned counsel for applicant contended that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the case. Business transaction has been
sought to be converted into criminality. There was non-payment of food
supply even assuming that there are certain lapse on the point of the
applicant in not making the payment as alleged by the complainant, it is a
pure civil dispute and the proper remedy was to go to the competent civil
court. In another matter similar to the present case, the applicant has been
enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 22.01.2025 passed in M.Cr.C.
No.53698/2024. Learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the judgment
passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Delhi Race Club Vs. State
of U.P., AIR 2024 SC 4321. Applicant is a lady aged 44 years, hence,
he prays that the applicant be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the respondents/State opposed the prayer and
prayed for its rejection.
Learned counsel for the complainant also vehemently opposed the
prayer and prayed for its rejection by submitting that in the present case
offence under Section 409 of IPC has also been added and in the earlier
matter, offence under Section 409 of the IPC was not there. It is further
submitted that in the earlier case, the State has also filed application for
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:9446
3 MCRC-16928-2025
cancellation of bail.
Parties are heard and perused the case diary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking
note of the fact that in another matter the applicant has been enlarged on
anticipatory bail vide order dated 22.01.2025, but the facts of that case are
different and distinguishable to this case; in the instant case offence under
section 409 of the IPC has also been registered which was not registered in
the earlier matter; apart from the above, applicant is now having criminal
antecedent of one case in the present matter; and in the aforesaid earlier
matter, State has also filed an application for cancellation of bail; in the
instant matter the investigation is going on, therefore, under these
circumstances, at this stage, it cannot be said that it is a purely civil case.
In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory
bail.
Hence, this application for anticipatory bail is dismissed.
(ANIL VERMA)
JUDGE
Vishal
