Madhya Pradesh High Court
Surendra Soni vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 March, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:12987
1 CRA-1825-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 12th OF MARCH, 2025
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1825 of 2025
SURENDRA SONI
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Mr. Deepak Swarnkar - Advocate for appellant.
Ms. Neetu Pashine - Panel Lawyer for State.
ORDER
Notice has been served to the victim but none appeared.
This is the first Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant under Section
14-A (1) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (POA) Act, 1989
seeking bail in connection with Crime No.3 of 2024 for offences punishable
under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections
3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention
of Atrocities) Act, 1989 registered at Police Station- AJAK, District-Shahdol
(M.P.).
2. Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that the victim and the
appellant were having transactions of gold. The victim is a government
teacher and she was also doing the business of selling gold and she had
deposited gold in Mannapuram Gold Finance Limited Shahdol but
installments were not paid, hence, the gold was to be auctioned and when the
appellant came to know the fact from the Manager of Mannapuram Gold
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:12987
2 CRA-1825-2025
Finance Limited Shahdol, on the assurance of Amit Tripathi that he will
secure the gold on cheap rates, he went Shahdol and contacted the Branch
Manager and deposited the money for purchase of gold. Further, the victim
contacted him and submitted that if the money paid, she will further sell the
gold and on that pretext, she had taken more than Rs.21,00,000/-. Time and
again, he made pressure to return the money or supply the gold but the
victim and her husband given the assurances and when he was confident that
the victim and her husband will not return the money, he has filed complaint
to various Police Authorities i.e. SP, EOW Jabalpur and filed a complaint
before the Judicial Magistrate First Class. Police had not registered the case
and on that basis, the victim to save herself from paying the money, has
falsely lodged the report against the appellant. The appellant has also made
the representation to the Police Authorities but Police Authority was not
properly enquiring the matter and further submitted that though in this case,
the case is also registered under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and on that basis, the trial Court had not
entertained the anticipatory bail application but looking to the facts and
circumstances, the appellant be given the benefit of anticipatory bail as no
case for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 is made out.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has also relied on the judgment of
Danish Khan @ Saahil Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (2021)1 Crimes
2 5 7 and has submitted that in different judgments of the Hon'ble Apex
Court, the Apex Court has considered that in the cases where the provisions
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:12987
3 CRA-1825-2025
of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 are not attracted, the Bar of Section 18-A of SC & ST (POA) Act is not
applicable, the anticipatory bail application is maintainable.
4. Learned counsel for State has submitted that it is a clear case of
violating the privacy of a victim and the appellant on the false grounds,
prepared the documents to save himself from the legal action, hence, no case
for anticipatory bail is made out.
5. Firstly, from the case diary, it is admitted fact that the victim and the
appellant came in contact first time on the basis that the victim took loan on
the basis of gold and the Manager of Mannapuram Gold Finance Limited
Shahdol wanted to auction the gold and the Manager has introduced the
appellant to the victim that he will purchase the gold.
6. From the conversation attached along with the record and the money
transactions as stated above shows that offence may be of Indian Penal
Code/Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 but the offence has not been committed
on the basis of the cast of the victim.
7. After hearing the parties and looking to the case diary and looking
to the fact that the victim and the appellant were known to each other for
business purpose, the appellant has also filed complaints and legal
proceedings against the victim. The offence for the first time was committed
on 14.06.2023 and last on, 28.09.2023 but FIR was lodged on 22.02.2024,
this Court deems it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail
but without commenting anything on merits of the case, bail application filed
on behalf of appellant is allowed.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:12987
4 CRA-1825-2025
8. It is directed that in the event of arrest the appellant shall be
enlarged on bail on furnishing a personal bond in a sum of Rs.50,000/-
(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the Arresting Officer for his appearance before him during the
course of investigation.
9. The appellant shall also co-operate with the Investigation Agency
and he shall mark his presence before the Investigating Officer on intimation
by Investigating Officer at reasonable time and place if required.
10. The appellant shall submit the documents and shall produce
himself before the Government Medical Practitioner, if required, for the
medical examination.
11. It is further directed that the appellant shall abide by all the
conditions as enumerated under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
12. Accordingly, Cr.A. stands disposed of.
13. C.C. as per rules.
(DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE
julie
