1. This application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as `the Code' for short) for releasing the applicant on regular bail in connection with C.R.No.I-18 of 2019 registered with Bopal police station for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 409, 506(2) read with Section 114 of Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard learned senior counsel Mr. S.V. Raju assisted by learned advocates Ms. Trusha Patel, Mr. B.N. Limbachia and Ms. Zeal Shah for the applicant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. J.K. Shah for the respondent-State and learned senior counsel Mr. Y.N. Oza assisted by learned advocate Mr. Ankit Shah for the respondent-complainant.

3. Learned senior counsel Mr. Raju for the applicant referred to the allegations made against the applicant in the FIR in question and contended that the original complainant has suppressed the material fact while filing the FIR. It is alleged in the FIR that as per the agreement, 11 flats, details of which are referred in the FIR are agreed to be sold to the complainant, however, the applicant has not executed the sale deed in favour of the complainant. It is further alleged in the FIR that so far as the flat no.D-503 is concerned, though it is mentioned in the agreement that it is to be sold to the complainant, the applicant has executed sale deed in favour of one Snehaben Jitendrakumar Bhavsar and Jitendrakumar Sudhakar Bhavsar. It is, therefore, alleged by the complainant that the applicant and other co-accused have committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 409, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.1. Learned senior counsel Mr. Raju thereafter referred to the agreement entered into between the applicant and the complainant and thereafter pointed out that flat no.D-503 is not referred in the said agreement and therefore the complainant has suppressed the said fact while filing the FIR. It is further contended that though it is alleged by the complainant that 11 cheques each worth Rs.14,00,000/- are given to the applicant towards the amount of consideration of sale transaction but the sale deeds are not executed in favour of the complainant. However, the said allegation is not correct because all the cheques are undated and only photocopies of such cheques are given for preparation of the sale deed. The original cheques are not handed over to the applicant. Learned senior counsel has referred to the copy of the cheques which are produced at page nos.52 to 55 of the compilation. After referring to the said cheques, it is contended that flat no.D-503 is also not referred in the said cheques. Learned senior counsel, therefore, urged that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant and the complainant has converted civil transaction into criminal prosecution and without filing civil suit for execution of the sale deed, FIR in question is filed. Therefore, it is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court.

3.2 Learned senior counsel Mr. Raju, thereafter, contended that Sections 406 and 420 of Indian Penal Code cannot go together as per the decision rendered by this Court. Learned senior counsel has referred to the decision rendered by this court in the case of Rajnikant Ambalal Patel V/s State of Gujarat and another, reported in 1987(2) GLR 1152 and also to the decision of this Court in the case of Arvindbhai Maganlal Master and Ors. V/s State of Gujarat and Ors., reported in 2015(1) GLH 149.

3.3 Learned senior counsel Mr. Raju, thereafter, would submit that the alleged offences are punishable with seven years imprisonment and triable by the Court of Magistrate. Further, looking to the allegations levelled against the applicant and when the applicant is in jail since 3.3.2019, this Court may enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Learned senior counsel has placed reliance upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohan Singh V/s Union Territory, Chandigarh reported in