IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJEEV S KALGAONKAR

th

ON THE 20 OF JANUARY, 2026 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 59896 of 2025 SACHIN Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Manish Yadav, Advocate for the applicant.

Ms. Usha Chauhan, Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

ORDER This first application has been filed by applicant under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.515/2016 registered at Police Station Kachroad, District Ujjain (M.P.) for offence punishable under Section (s) 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 34 of IPC and under Section 6(1) of The Madhya Pradesh Nikshepakon ke Hiton ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2000. The applicant is in judicial custody since 06.12.2016(as per arrest memo).

Heard the arguments.

Perused the grounds for grant of bail stated in the application, case diary and the relevant material on record.

Learned counsel for the applicant, in addition to the grounds mentioned in the application, submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the alleged offence for the reason that he is alleged to be Director of BNG Global India Limited Company. There is no allegation that applicant induced anyone to invest in any Company. There is no direct accusation against the applicant. The final report has been submitted on completion of investigation. As per the status report, only 13 witnesses out of 41 enlisted witnesses could be examined till date. The trial is delayed and would take time to conclude. There is no likelihood of tampering with evidence by the applicant for the reason that material prosecution witness have been examined. Jail incarceration is causing hardship to the applicant and dependent family. Applicant is ready to cooperate in further trial.

Per Contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the application on the ground of gravity of alleged offence. She further submits that it is a case of fraud with many investors, therefore, the applicant may not be extended benefit of bail. Learned counsel further refers to 04 criminal antecedents against the applicant, as mentioned in the case diary. The applicant is aged around 34 years(as per arrest memo) and is a Director of a Company.

In reply, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the other matters are pending for trial. He has never been convicted.

As per the accusation on record, Kamlabai, Bharat, Dilip Chouhan, Shivnarayan, Ashok, Dinesh, Gopal Rukmani and others submitted a written complaint to the SHO, P.S. Kachroad, District Ujjain(M.P.) that Radheshyam, Atoliya, Dashrath, Raju, Nandkishore, Prakash, Bherulal and Pyarji induced them to invest in B.N. Gold Sai Prasad Company on promise of handsome profit and doubling their investment in five years. Accordingly, they and other villagers deposited the money. They were issued Fixed Deposit and Recurring Deposit receipts by Radheshyam, Atoliya, Dashrath, Kailash, Nandkishore and Bherulal. Later, they were informed that the Company has closed the operation and fled away with the invested money. The P.S. Kachroad registered FIR for offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of IPC. The investigation revealed that the applicant Sachin was Director of B.N. Gold SaiPrasad Company. The applicant was arrested on 06.12.2016. He is in custody ever since. On completion of investigation, final report was submitted. The trial is underway. Apparently, the trial is delayed. Twenty Five(25) prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. The trial would take time to conclude. The contentions advanced by the applicant have prima-facie merit and cannot be dismissed as manifestly baseless. The veracity of the prosecution and complicity of the applicant will be considered on merit after evidence.

As informed, applicant has responsibility of dependent family. Considering the age, profession and status of the applicant, there appears to be no possibility of fleeing from justice. In absence of any substantial criminal past and previous conviction