PANKAJ JAIN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant has filed this first bail application under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. He is in jail since 8/2/2023 in connection with Crime No.30/22 registered at P.S. - Crime Branch, Indore (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 420, 419, 467, 468, 471, 170 and 34 of IPC.

(2.) As per the prosecution story, a complaint has been made by the complainant Yogesh Malviya before the Dy. Commissioner, Crime Branch, Indore alleging that co-accused Neelam Parashar impersonated herself as SDM and she told the complainant that she will provide service of guard at collectorate. When the complainant contacted her on mobile phone, she called him in the collectorate and told that if he will pay Rs.2.00 Lakh, then he will get government job as a Guard. Thereafter complainant has given an amount of Rs.2.00 Lakh to the co-accused Neelam Parashar on 8/1/2022 and gave him an appointment letter, ID card and dress of guard. Complainant received Rs.10,000.00 as a salary for two months, but he did not get joining. Thereafter, he came to know that Neelam Parashar has committed fraud with him on the pretext of providing job to him. During the investigation, it has been gathered that present applicant who is running a kiosk MP Online hatched the conspiracy with the co-accused Neelam and he has transferred the different amount to the victim persons by showing that the amount was disbursed by the government agencies. Accordingly offence has been registered against the present applicant and other co-accused persons.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this matter. He is in custody since 8/2/2023. He is not named in the FIR. Investigation is over and supplementary charge sheet has been filed against him on 8/5/2023. He is a businessman and running a registered Kiosk MP Online. He is having shop establishment license. He is also a victim of the main accused, who has cheated him, therefore, he made a complaint against the main accused Neelam. There is absolutely nothing in the disclosure memo of the main accused Neelam. There is no legal evidence available on record against the present applicant to implicate him in the aforementioned offence. Final conclusion of trial will take considerable long time. Hence, he prays that applicant be released on bail.