ARPIT SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the second application under Sec. 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant. Applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.504/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Shivpuri for the offence punishable under Ss. 318(4), 316(5), 61(2) of BNS and Sec. 13(1)(a) of PC Act. First application was dismissed on merits vide order dtd. 27/9/2025 passed in M.Cr.C.No.44603/2025.

(2.) As per prosecution case, in compliance of order of Collector dtd. 25/7/2025 the SDM, Shivpuri had written a letter on the same day to Tehsildar and thereafter Tehsildar had written an application making request to register the FIR and same has been produced at Police Station by one Ravi Prakash Lodhi who was the Patwari stating therein that complaint about the construction of roads in various wards (1, 7, 17, 31, 36, and 39). An inspection team, constituted by the Collector, found discrepancies between the materials listed in the measurement book (GSB, WMM, and Zeera) and the materials physically present at the construction site. A search report, submitted by Sachin Chauhan, Rajesh Dhakad, and Ranjit Khapre, revealed that the actual quantity of materials was less than what was recorded. This deficit in materials was valued at Rs.16,13,906..00 On the basis of which, aforesaid FIR has been registered against the present applicant and other co-accused persons.

(3.) Counsel for the applicant submits that the work involved was temporary in nature (laying kattal and Muram) and was completed in February 2025, while the inspection occurred in July 2025. Due to excessive monsoon rains in Shivpuri that year, the temporary construction work sustained damage. It is further submitted that the FIR, even if taken at face value, did not disclose the ingredients of fraudulent or dishonest intention causing damage or harm, which is the very gist of the offence of cheating alleged in the FIR. Therefore, the same ought to be quashed at the first instance. The Counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court to the legal notice dated July 7, 2025, regarding harassment, obstruction of work, and retaliatory, discriminatory actions by the Shivpuri Municipal Council against the applicant's firm. The Counsel submits that the present FIR has been lodged against the applicant as a result of these actions. It is further submitted that the applicant's case is on a better footing than that of the co-accused persons-Satish Nigam, Assistant Engineer, and Jitendra Parihar, Sub Engineer-who have already been granted regular bail by the Trial Court. Lastly, it is submitted that the father of the present applicant underwent a major heart surgery on May 30, 2025, at G.B. Pant Hospital, New Delhi. As per medical advice, a mandatory post-surgery follow-up has been scheduled for 1/10/2025, at the same hospital, and the applicant's presence is required to look after him. It is further submitted that when an arrested person is produced before a Judicial Magistrate for remand, it is the duty of the Magistrate to ascertain whether compliance with Article 22(1) has been made. However, in the present case, the said compliance was not made by the Magistrate. In support of his contention he has relied upon the judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and Anr reported in AIR 2025 SC 1388. He has drawn attention of this Court to order dtd. 25/7/2025, wherein, during the site inspection, it was not possible to compare the depth calculated for the previous work with the depth of the present situation, hence the depth recorded in the measurement book has been considered as the depth of the present situation. Investigation is over and charge-sheet has been filed. Two other co-accused have been granted bail by the trial court itself. In the present context, the custodial interrogation is not required and the trial would take sufficient time. Applicant is permanent resident of District Shivpuri, therefore, there is no apprehension of his absconsion. Hence, he prays that applicant be enlarged on bail.