IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA rd ON THE 3 OF NOVEMBER, 2023 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 44299 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

1. DILIP S/O BADRILAL AGRAWAL, AGED 43 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O GRAM BADAGAON NALKHEDA DISTT. AGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. MUSTKEEM S/O SHABEER AJMERI, AGED 43 YE A R S , OCCUPATION: BUSINESS GRAM BADAGAON NALKHEDA DIST. AGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. DILIP S/O SHYAMLAL PATIDAR, AGED 30 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS GRAM BADAGAON NALKHEDA DIST. AGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPLICANTS (BY SHRI AVINASH KUMAR KHARE- ADVOCATE)

AND THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE STATION NALKHEDA DIST. AGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT ( BY SHRI AMIT RAWAL - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

Heard on IA No. 16334/2023 which is an application for taking documents on record.

2 Documents may be relevant for proper adjudication of the matter, therefore, IA is allowed and documents are taken on record.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUNESHWAR

3 This is the first application filed by the applicants under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail relating to Crime No. 325/2023 registered at Police Station Nalkheda District Agar (M.P.) for the offence under Sections 420, 419, 327. 506(2), 384/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

4 As per the prosecution story, present applicants Dilip Agrawal, Mustkeem and Dilip Patidar alongwith other co-accused persons with malafide intention prepared forged documents and hatched a conspiracy and illegally sold out government land bearing survey No. 1375 admeasuring 0.39 hectare situated at village Gudrawan to other co-accused persons. Complainant Jitendra Sanwla filed a private complaint before JMFC Nalkheda. Thereafter trial court has taken cognizance against applicants and other accused persons for the commission of aforesaid offence. Accordingly, a case has been registered against the present applicants.

5 Learned counsel for the applicants contended that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this offence. The procedure for taking cognizance against the applicants by the trial court is erroneous. Complaint has been filed with an inordinate delay of three months, no ingredients of section 327 of IPC is established in the instant case. There was old dispute regarding land in question between the parties and some of revenue cases are also pending and with an intention to create pressure upon the applicants, the offences have been registered. He placed reliance upon order dated 19.3.2015 passed by Hon'ble Supreme court in criminal appeal No. 781/2012 in the matter of Mr. Priyanka Srivastava and another Vs. State of UP; judgment dated 29.1.2008 passed in SLP (Cril.) 1719 of 2006 in the matter of Som Mittal Vs Govt. of Karnataka; judgment dated 12.11.2013 passed in WP Signature Not Verified Signed by: BHUNESHWAR (Criminal) No. 68 of 2008 in the matter of Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt of UP and connected matters; judgment dated 18.2.2022 passed in criminal appeal no. 252 of 2022 in the matter of Babu Venkatesh Vs. State of Karnataka; judgment dated 7.12.2007 passed in SLP (Cr.) No. 6404/2007 in the matter of Sakiri Vasu Vs. State of UP; order dated 20.1.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 23 of 2022 in the matter of Satyaprakash Vs. State of UP; Ajay Goenka Vs. State of MP reported in 2013(2) MPLJ (Cri.) 47; order dated 23.2.2022 in the matter of Daivesh Gupta Vs. State of MP passed in M.Cr.C. No. 694/2013, order dated 23.8.2017 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 8637/2017 in the matter of Indrajeet Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, order dated 23.3.2022 passed in M.Cr.C. no. 13437 of 2022 in the matter of Sawant Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Mahesh HC Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2023) 03KAR CK 0062 in support of his submission.

Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail may be considered on such t