SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(MP) 6071

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE (SINGLE BENCH : HON. Mr. JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA)

M.Cr.C. No. 36906 of 2021 (Keshav Nachani S/o. Late Bhagwandas Nachani V/s. State of M.P.)

Date: 17.08.2021 :

Shri A.K. Sethi, Sr. Advocate with Shri Vishwajit Joshi, Advocate.

Shri Aditya Garg, Govt.Advocate for the respondent/State by Ms. Chitralekha Hardia,.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

Advocates:
Vishwajit Joshi,Advocate General

O R D E R

This is a repeat (2nd) application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. by the applicant – Keshav Nachani S/o. Late Bhagwandas Nachani, who is in custody since 17.3.2021 in connection with Crime No.159/2021 registered at Police Station Khajrana, District Indore for the offence punishable under Section 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the IPC. The first application was dismissed vide order dated 8.6.2021 passed in M.Cr.C. No.24658/2021 on merit.

As per prosecution case, complainant Mr. Madhusudan Nyati and others have lodged an FIR at Police Station Khajrana, Indore (at Crime No.159/21) that they are members of Mazdoor Panchayat Grih Nirman Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Indore (for short 'the society'). The society started development of Residential colony in the name of Pushp Vihar Colony in the year 1990 and allotted the plots to its members and thereafter sale deeds were also executed. The complainants came to know that Deepak Jain @ Dilip Sisodiya @ Deepak Maddha s/o Anandilal Jain in connivance with the then president of the society Dipesh Bohra, Vice President Kamlesh Jain, Manager Nasim Hyder had purchased the land of the society as an agricultural land (area 2.5 acres out of 15.5 acres of land) by way of forged sale deed dated 31.03.2006. Nasim Hyder who signed the sale deed in the capicity of the Manager was not authorized by the society to execute the sale deed. No permission from the District Registrar, Cooperative Societies was obtained before execution of the sale deed. They have sold the land of the society which had already been allotted/sold to the members including the complainant and others. After registration of two Firsthe investigation was started . It has been reveled that that the present applicant and Omprakash Dhanwani got executed sale deed dated 31.03.2006 for total sale consideration of Rs.2 Crores and for payment of the sale consideration , applicant Keshav Nachani issued forged cheques of Rs.50 lakhs each, out of which, one cheque was deposited in the society's account No.57064 at Nandanagar Sahkari Sanstha and the remaining 3 cheques remained unpaid till date. An amount of Rs.50 lakhs had also been forfeited by the applicant and Nasim Hyder as the society did not open any account in the Nandanagar Sahkari Sanstha .The applicant and the other accused persons have opened the account No.57064 in the name of society in order to deposit the cheque of Rs.50 lakhs, therefore, the society did not receive any amount from the present applicant after execution of the aforesaid sale deed.

Another FIR has been lodged (at Crime No.161/2021) by the complainant D.Devrajan s/o Dharmrajan for the offence punishable under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC r/w 120-B IPC against the applicant and other accused, hence the present bail applications before this Court, hence two bail applications have been filed by the applicant.

Shri A.K. Sethi, learned senior counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the earlier (first) application was dismissed mainly on the ground that other co-accused have not been arrested; secondly, the investigation is pending; thirdly, looking to the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature . He submits that all the accused have now been arrested; the investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant is aged about 61 years. The entire case is based on documentary evidence which have already been seized by the police, therefore, there is no question of tempering with any evidence. No custodial interrogation is required now in this case. No purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail during pendency of the trial. The trial may take time to conclude because of the voluminous record as well as examination of 34 witnesses of the prosecution. Shri Sethi further submits that the applicant is a bona fide purchase of the land admeasuring 2.5 Acres by way of registered sale- deed dated 24.4.2006. Even if the seller was not not having authority to e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top