Madhya Pradesh High Court
Abhay Singh vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 15 January, 2025
Author: Prem Narayan Singh
Bench: Prem Narayan Singh
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:889
1 MCRC-55247-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
ON THE 15 th OF JANUARY, 2025
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 55247 of 2024
ABHAY SINGH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Ashish Gupta - advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Kamal Kumar Tiwari - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
ORDER
Heard and perused the case diary.
This is the first bail application filed on behalf of the applicant under Section
483 of BNSS, 2023 (Section 439 of the Cr.P.C, 1973) for grant of bail in relation
to FIR/Crime No.171/2024 dated (not mentioned), registered at Police Station-
M.G. Road, District Indore, for the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474
and 120-B/34 of IPC, 1860. The applicant is in jail since 17.05.2024.
2. As per prosecution story, an FIR was registered by police Station M.G.
Road, Indore alleging that few firms and other persons have presented false and
forged documents regarding the construction work of sewage line in Drainage
Department and have attempted to take money from Nagar Nigam by presenting
false bills and work orders of such firms. Subsequently, FIR bearing Crime
No.171/2024 was registered against the accused persons and later on, on the basis
of memorandum statement of another co-accused, present applicant was made
accused.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:889
2 MCRC-55247-2024
3. It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been
implicated in the present case falsely. It is further submitted that the present
applicant has been made accused only on the basis of statements of co-accused
persons Rameshwar Parmar, Abhay Rathore, Rahul Vadhera and Jahid Khan
recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Present applicant has no role in
preparation of forged documents and his signature has been said to be forged but
after completion of approximately 8 months no hand writing expert report has
been filed against the applicant in which it is visualized that the said signatures
were made by the present applicant. Except one mobile nothing has been seized
from the possession of the applicant. There is no evidence regarding any payment
in favour of the applicant. No amount has been received by the applicant in is
account.
4. Learned counsel applicant also submitted that one of the co-accused
Samar Singh Parmar has been granted bail by Hon'ble Apex Court. Counsel relied
upon paragraphs 24, 25, 39 and 40 of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported as (2012)1 SCC 40
in support of his contentions. Applicant is in custody since 17.05.2024
(approximately 8 months in custody). Other co-accused persons namely
Murlidhar, Uday Singh Rathore, Chetan Bhadoriya, Anil Garg, Bilkis Khan have
already granted by by trial Court whereas Mohd. Jakir and Bilkis Khan have
enlarged on bail by this Court and Mohd. Aihatesham Khan has been granted bail
by Hon'ble Apex Court. Under these circumstances, counsel for the applicant
prays for bail.
5. On the contrary Govt. Advocate opposed the application by submitting
that applicant has played active role in the offence and if bail is granted to the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:889
3 MCRC-55247-2024
applicant on the basis that applicant was not working at Drainage Department in
Trenching Ground at the duration of occurrence of crime, then State should be
permitted to file cancellation application if he is found posted at Drainage
Department at the relevant point of time, as the case is pertaining to Drainage
Department. However, Govt. Advocate fairly admitted that the applicant has not
taken any amount in his account and except the statements of co-accused, there is
nothing on record against him.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, accusation
of the applicant so also the custody period of the applicant and the fact that the
applicant was not working as Executive Engineer in Drainage Department, there is
no specific recovery from the applicant and charge sheet has been filed, but
without commenting upon the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate
to allow this application. Accordingly, the application is allowed.
7. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, for his
regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he shall
remain present before the concerned Court on all the dates fixed by it during trial.
He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
8. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial. However, in case of
bail jump and breach of any of the conditions of bail, it shall become ineffective.
Certified copy as per rules.
(PREM NARAYAN SINGH)
JUDGE
sumathi
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:889
4 MCRC-55247-2024
