ORDER

This is first application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for grant of bail to the applicant who is in custody in connection with Crime No.103/2021 registered by Cyber Cell, Bhopal and against the applicant under Section 420 of IPC and under Section 66 D of IT Act, 2000.

Learned senior counsel for the applicant has vehemently contended that in the present case FIR has been registered on 08.07.2021 and charge-sheet was filed on 11.10.2021 wherein the name of the present applicant and one Hitesh Sherawat have been involved because of their capaity as the Directors of M/s Cosureindia Private Ltd. However, in fact, the applicant is not the Director of the said company.

The allegation against them is that the money duped the complainant has been received in the account of the company maintained in the ICICI Bank, Gurgaon. Further submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he is working as Company Secretary, he has no criminal antecedent. He has no role in the day to day affairs of the accused company. He had only assisted the Director Mr. Hitesh Sherawat. It is contended that the police without affording any opportunity of explanation to the applicant, suddenly arrested him Learned trial Court in its order rejecting the bail application of the applicant mentioned him as absconder. It is further prayed that no offence is made out against the present applicant as ingredients of Section 420 of the IPC are missing.

Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that co-accused Satyendra Singh has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 15.12.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.56252/2021. Learned senior counsel for the applicant has pointed out that the complainant himself appeared before the trial Court and stated before the Court that he has no objection if the applicant is enlarged on bail because they have already settled their dispute and the same is of civil in nature. In support of his submissions, learned senior counsel has placed reliance on the decisions in the cases of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Another, (2014) 8 SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau Of Investigation and another (2022) 10 SCC 51. It is, therefore, prayed that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned Government Advocate strongly opposed the contentions and submitted that during the investigation police collected sufficient evidence against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the complainant stated that he has no objection in case the applicant is enlarged on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

As per the memorandum of the applicant, he was CS of the company.

Police recovered following incriminating articles from him:

i. Samsung S-22 Ultra Mobile with Airtel SIM bearing no.7206733105, JIO SIM bearing number 9896551086.

ii. Registered document from pg 1 to 24 of Cosureindia Trding Pvt Ltd. iii. Cheque book of ICICI Bank of account no.002105501843.

iv. Black seal in which "for Cosureindia Trading Pvt. Ltd Director" was mentioned.

Statements of Saransh, Hitesh, Rahul Yadav and others recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C as well as the other documents prima facie show the involvement of the applicant in commission of the crime in question.

There are many documents annexed along with the case diary indicating huge transaction between the parties. The complainant - Sandeep Patwardhan has lodged a complaint alleging that the accused persons cheated a huge amount of Rs.43,32,000/- from the complainant by alluring him on the false promise of profit. Huge amount of Rs43,32,000/- is involved in this case and the applicant and his other associates committed the crime in preplanned way by adopting different tactics in this case. Police also recovered a pendrive form Hitesh in which there are audio and video recording of the applicant is available.

Hitesh was one of a Director of Cosureindia Trading Pvt. Ltd. who lodged a written complaint regarding criminal co