Manish Mishra vs State of Jharkhand & Anr

Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.

Learned senior counsel, Mr. A.K. Kashyap, assisted by learned counsel Mr. Vikas Pandey, submits that this criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C by the petitioner with a prayer for modification of the order dated 11.03.2019, passed by this court in ABA No. 3908 of 2018 upon showing the readiness and willingness to pay the part of the amount misappropriated by the petitioner to the victims Viku Nand, Ram Chandra Das and Kailash Prasad. It is next submitted that as per the investigation done by the Investigating Officer of the case, who being present in this court on 11.03.2019 informed this court that during the investigation, he found that the petitioner has cheated and committed criminal breach of trust of Rs. 6,50,000 from Viku Nand, Rs. 1,63,000/- from Ram Chandra Das and Rs. 3,80,000/- from Kailash Prasad. It is then submitted that the petitioner was granted the privilege of anticipatory bail upon the petitioner becoming ready to abide the condition of the anticipatory bail that he will deposit demand drafts of Rs. 2,20,000/- drawn in favour of Viku Nand, Rs. 60,000/- drawn in favour of Ram Chandra Das and Rs. 1,30,000/- drawn in favour of Kailash Prasad without prejudice to his defence. It is further submitted that the said order of this court was assailed by the petitioner before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 06.08.2019 in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Cr.) (No(s). 6797- 6798/2019, declined to interfere with the said order of this court and dismissed the Special Leave Petition with a liberty to the petitioner to approach this court for modification of the condition imposed by this court for grant of anticipatory bail, if so advised and it was observed that in case the application is filed before this court, the same be decided on its own merits and in accordance with law. It is further submitted by learned senior counsel that the aforesaid order was passed on the basis on the wrong submission of the Investigating Officer of the case as he has travelled beyond the allegation levelled against the petitioner in the FIR. In this criminal miscellaneous petition, the petitioner has made following prayer:

"Under the circumstances mentioned above it is most respectfully prays that your Lordships may kindly be pleased to allow this modification petition and may kindly modify the order dated 11.03.2019 passed in the above case to the extent by which this Hon'ble Court directed the petitioner to be released on bail on depositing the demand draft of Rs 2,20,000/- in favour of Viku Nand, Rs. 60,000/- in favour of Ram Chandra Das and Rs. 1,30,000/- in favour of Kailash Prasad although money, if any, paid by said witnesses was paid to the OP No.-2 i.e. informant and not the petitioner and the said informant issued various cheques to the said witnesses in order to return the money to the said witnesses. Otherwise also the conduct of informant who himself filed ABP No 920 of 2019 and subsequently withdrawn it raises serious doubt on prosecution story. Moreover, there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner had taken the said money from the aforesaid witnesses"

Mr. Kashyap further submits that the meaning of the aforesaid prayer is that the petitioner wants that the condition of depositing the three demand drafts in favour of three victims be deleted. It is further submitted by learned senior counsel for the petitioner that in paragraphs 5, 6, and 7 of the case diary, the witnesses have stated that they have paid the alleged amount to the complainant and not to Manish Mishra, hence, it is submitted that the order dated 11.03.2019, passed by this court in ABA No. 3908 of 2018 be modified to the aforesaid extent.

Mr. Vikas Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not in a position to deposit the said demand drafts.

Learned Addl. PP on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for modification of the said order and submits that the petitioner upon his undertaking to deposit said amount and upon his not disputing the submission made by the Investigating Officer being present in the court, the anticipatory bail was granted to him but now the petitioner is acting smart by going back from his undertaking. It is then submitted that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation of criminal breach of trust, cheating and forgery of huge amount of money from innocent victims, which conduct of the petitioner is corroborated by filing this petition after getting the privilege of anticipatory bail upon undertaking to pay the part of the misappropriated amount to the victims but later on going back from such undertaking, this petition being without merit be dismissed.

Having heard the submissions made the Bar and after going through the record, it is crystal clear that the petitioner did not dispute the findings of the Investigating Officer during investigation that the petitioner has taken much more amount than the amount he has undertook to pay the concerned victims and upon his undertaking to pay the said amounts voluntarily, he was granted the privilege of anticipatory bail but now without any rhyme or reason, he intends to go back from his undertaking to pay the amount, hence, this court is of considered view that keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against him, this is not a fit case, where order dated 11.03.2019, in ABA No. 3908 of 2018 be modified. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. This criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly.