Pawan Verma vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Heard, Case-diary perused.

This repeat (fourth) application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant-Pawan Verma who is implicated in connection with Crime No.424/2017, registered at Police Station-Malharganj, District-Indore, concerning offence under Sections 420, 421, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of IPC, 1860 read with Sections 5/6 of M.P. Nikshepakon ke Hiton ka Samrakshan Adhiniyam 2000.

Earlier applications were dismissed as withdrawn vide orders dated 23/01/2018, 02/04/2018 and 14/08/2018 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos.25018/2017, 8418/2018, 27172/2018

As per prosecution story, main accused persons Sapna Bharti, Narendra Bharti and Vinod Bharti have started chit fund and they made about 250 members, collected money from them, however, they have not opened any draw or returned the money to the members and thus committed cheating.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the present crime. The prosecution has already examined four material witnesses before the trial Court and none of them have supported the prosecution story in so far as it relates to the present applicant. They have categorically deposed that the main accused persons Sapna Bharti, Narendra Bharti and Vinod Bharti are the persons who had received the money and the applicant was only the employee of the said accused persons. He is not the beneficiary of the transaction and in fact he also suffered in the hands of the main accused persons. The applicant is in custody since 07/11/2017 and conclusion of trial will take sufficient long time. Under these changed circumstances learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application by submitting that in the Court statement Durgesh Joya (P.W.1), Mahendra Pandey (P.W.2) have not only identified the present applicant but also stated that the applicant is the person who collected the deposit amount from them, therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant was only the employee of Sapna Bharti, Narendra Bharti & Vinod Bharti and he was not having any knowledge that why the amount was collected from the beneficiaries. It is also submitted that the trial is in progress and there is no ground available to release the applicant on bail. Hence counsel prayed for rejection of the application.

After considering the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the statement of the witnesses, this Court is of the view that there is sufficient material available on record to show the involvement of the present applicant in the present crime. While deciding the bail application, the evidence led by the prosecution cannot be appreciated, therefore, this Court is of the view that no case is made out for grant of bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.38200/2019 is hereby dismissed.

Certified copy as per rules.