HAIDER ALI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the first application filed by the applicant under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.18/2023 registered at Police Station Budhar District Shahdol for the offences punishable under Ss. 420, 120-B of IPC.

(2.) As per complainant Rajju Singh, one Tauhid alias Chhotu Khan convincing him that by digging out the gold coin, which is buried in his house, his wife would get cure by doing "Jhaad Phook". In this manner after convincing him for which he collected more than Rs. 10.00 lakhs from the complainant. It is alleged that Tauhid brought two persons posing them as his Guru for digging out the gold from the house. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not been named in the FIR. It is pointed out that the alleged incident happened on 1/3/2022, whereas the FIR was lodged on 6/1/2023 that is more than ten months later. It is stated that the present applicant has been named in the memorandum of co-accused Tauhid and on this basis only, he has been now implicated by the police in this offence. It is further stated that Rajju Singh has also taken the name of co-accused Tauhid and two other persons, whom he did not know. Per contra the stand of learned counsel for the State is that Gorelal, who is father of Rajju Singh is the resident of same village and he knew that present applicant is the Guru, who was brought in by co-accused Tauhid.

(3.) I have the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. The statement of Gorelal was recorded on 7/1/2023. As per his statement recorded under Sec. 161 of Cr.P.C. he knew the present applicant since long and he came to his house to dig up the gold. However, for ten months no complaint was lodged, which creates suspicion regarding the incident, though the investigation is still pending. However, as the present applicant is made accused only on the basis of statement of Gorelal, who has stated that Hyder Baba is the same person as Qadar. Considering the aforesaid, and without adverting into the merits of the case, this application is allowed.