[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Arun J. Maheshwari vs Central Investigation Bureau on 12 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20142
1 MCRC-48890-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL
ON THE 12th OF MARCH, 2026
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 48890 of 2025
ARUN J. MAHESHWARI
Versus
CENTRAL INVESTIGATION BUREAU
Appearance:
Shri Vijay Shankar Pandey - Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Vikram Singh - Advocate for the respondent/CBI.
ORDER
This is the first application under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of
bail in connection with Crime No. R.C.B.H.P.2003A0013 registered at
Police Station - Central Investigation Bureau through anti-corruption branch,
District - Bhopal (M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 120 (b), 419,
420, 468, 201, 471, 477(A) and Section 13(1)(D), 13(2) of Prevention of
Corruption Act. The applicant is in custody since 21.08.2025.
2. As per the prosecution story, it is alleged that applicant while
working as Assistant Grade in the Bhopal Branch of the Life Insurance
Corporation of India (LIC) committed a criminal conspiracy with the co-
accused to usurp and embezzle funds resulting in the illegal transfer of public
money amounting to Rs. 3,40,65,326/- (Rupees three crore forty lakh sixty-
five thousand three hundred twenty-six). Therefore, offence has been
registered against the applicant and co-accused persons under the aforesaid
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20142
2 MCRC-48890-2025
sections.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is in custody since
21.08.2025. It is further submitted that alleged crime was registered in 2003
and he got shifted to Mumbai in 2003 and at that time, the crime was not
registered. It is submitted that when inquiry was conducted, applicant has
co-operated in the investigation with the CBI. There is allegation that Rs.
3,40,65,326/- has been withdrawn through cheques but none of the amount
has been deposited in the bank account of applicant. It is submitted that
applicant had no knowledge that charge sheet is filed against him and no
notice was served to him. He had no knowledge that perpetual warrant has
been issued against him. Trial of 11 persons (co-accused) have been
completed in which one person was acquitted and 10 persons were convicted
with the sentence of 3 years and all 10 persons were on on bail during trial
and after the judgment. Applicant is not required for custodial interrogation
and conclusion of the trial will take considerable time therefore, it has been
prayed that the applicant may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/CBI has
opposed the bail application and submitted that present applicant is main
beneficiary. He was working as LIC Assistant and he was absconding since
2003. He was living in Mumbai by changing his name as Anil Jagdish
Chandak instead of Arun J Maheshwari and due to this reason, CBI was not
in position to arrest him therefore, permanent non-bailable warrant has been
issued. On 21.08.2025 he is arrested. It is also submitted that during search,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:20142
3 MCRC-48890-2025
17 bank accounts have been recovered from the house of applicant and the
cheques related to fraudulent payments were deposited in these 17 bank
accounts. Thereafter, the proceeds of the crime were transferred to the other
bank accounts and from those accounts the money has been withdrawn by
the applicant and other co-accused persons. It is submitted that details of all
the 17 bank accounts have been given and in all these accounts, money has
been withdrawn and it is the matter of defalcation of public money.
Therefore, prayed for it's rejection.
5. Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the case diary.
6. Looking to aforesaid facts and circumstances, seriousness of the
offence, embezzlement of public money, period of absconsion and the fact
that applicant was residing in Mumbai since 2003 by changing the name just
to escape from this offence, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
7. Accordingly, present MCRC stands dismissed.
(PRAMOD KUMAR AGRAWAL)
JUDGE
navin
