SAURABH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.58/2020, registered at Police Station-M.P. Nagar, Bhopal District- Bhopal for commission of offence punishable under Sections419, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of the IPC .

(2.) The case of the prosecution against the applicant is that the applicant assured one Satyam Shukla that he is working with ETV news channel and instigated him to run the NGO through this channel. After alluring him that NGO will work on some projects and he will collect the name through that NGO. The applicant received money from Satyam Shukla on so many pretexts and provided some forged documents. One of the documents is signed by the Chief Secretary S.R. Mohanti, forged signature of S.R. Mohanti was placed on that documents. On that basis, an FIR has been lodged under aforementioned Sections.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this second application for grant of anticipatory bail has been filed by the applicant on the ground that there is no iota of evidence on record as to indicate that the present applicant was involved in the matter. It is also submitted by him that the applicant is a Post Graduate in Mass Communication and is having no previous history of any criminal antecedent. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the matter. The trial of the case is not likely to reach its destiny in the near future and it will take considerable time. It is also submitted that in the wake of widespread of Corona Virus (COVID-19), the applicant is also entitled to for anticipatory bail. The applicant is having a dependent wife and a child of around six years and both of them are dependent upon the income of the applicant and if the applicant is arrested, then the family of the applicant will suffer financial hardship. In these premises, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.