IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT ON THE 5^th OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 6307 of 2022 Between:-

NEERAJ RAJAK S/O SHRI MANMOHAN RAJAK, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT MASTANA TAL RANJHI DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....APPELLANT (BY MR. MANISH DATT, SR. ADV. WITH MR. PAWAN GUJAR, ADV.)

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE STATION MAHILA THANA JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. VICTIM A D/O NOT MENTION NOT MENTION (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY MR. AMIT SHARMA, GOVT. ADVOCATE &

MR. VIKAS K. SANTU, ADV. FOR RES.NO.2.)

This appeal has come up for hearing on this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This is first criminal appeal filed on behalf of the appellant under Section

14-A (1) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of bail against order dated 18.07.2022 passed by Special Sessions Judge (SC/ST), Jabalpur (MP).

Appellant has been arrested on 09.07.2022 in connection with Crime No.45/2022 registered at Police Station-Mahila Thana Jabalpur, District-Jabalpur for the offences punishable under Sections 354(c), Section 67, 67-A of Information Technology Act, Section 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(va) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

It is submitted by learned Sr. counsel appearing for appellant that no offence under Section 467, 469, 471 is made out against the appellant. It is submitted that no documents had been forged. According to the prosecution story itself, sim cards was issued in name of Karan Vanskar and Shubham Chaturvedi on the basis of their adhar card. Said documents are not forged by appellant but said documents were original documents. The only role of appellant is that he handed over the sim card to one Nitin Rajak and not to the persons, who had given application for porting the sim card. Said act on part of appellant will not constitute offence under Sections 467, 469 & 471 of IPC. It is further submitted that appellant did not know that Nitin Rajak will misuse the sim card for purposes of committing the crime. In these circumstances, prayer is made to release the appellant on bail.

Learned Government Advocate appearing for State as well as counsel for Respondent no.2 opposed the criminal appeal for grant of bail to the appellant. It is submitted that it is appellant who had given inducement to Karan Vanskar and Shubham Chaturvedi to pay extra money and after paying money, he had obtained the documents from them and had given the sim card to Nitin Rajak, which was misused.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Even if the story of prosecution is taken to be true, then also offence of forgery and use of forged documents is not made out against appellant. No offence under Section 354(c) & 384 of IPC is committed by appellant and same has been committed by one Nitin.

Considering the same, this criminal appeal filed by appellant is allowed.

It is directed that on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) by the appellant along with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, the appellant be released on bail.

The appellant shall also abide by the following conditions of Section 437 (3) of Cr. P. C. as under:-

(a) that such person shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter;

(b) that such person shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected and;

(c) that such person shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

C.C. as per rules.

(VISHAL DHAGAT)

JUDGE nd N TI E W E A TI R I DDop20pAs5cD e n .5 E uo sB iN a 5 r g e =8 d =s t Ci . : 4 a i u e t C 7 N t H 8 c a l . : d a 8 d2 N