Mohammad Muddasar Khan vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Prakash Chandra Gupta, J

Heard with the aid of case diary.

This is repeat second bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant/accused, relating to FIR/Crime No.507/2021 d ated (not mentioned) registered at Police Station Maheshwar, District Khargone (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable u/S 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 and 120-B of IPC alongwith 66-D of the I.T. Act.

First bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 10.05.2024 passed in M.Cr.C. No.18225/2024 with liberty to renew the prayer after filing of the charge sheet before the trial court.

Prosecution story, in brief is that the co-accused Tushar is proprietor of M/s Rutu Enterprises, Pune (Maharashtra). Madhya Pradesh Rural Road Development Authority, Bhopal had invited a tender on 02.02.2018 for construction of road from Maheshwar to Karahi via Maheatwada, Bablai for Rs.1664.64 lacs and on 27.07.2018 for construction of bridge at Veda River for Rs.991.27 lacs. Co-accused Tushar's offer was accepted being the lowest bid and he had furnished 19 bank guarantees from Indian Bank branch at Pune (Maharashtra) for Rs.1,81,79,000/-; 2 bank guarantees from State Bank of India for a total amount of Rs.5,37,32,000/-. Thereafter, agreement was executed and work order was issued in favour of the co-accused. On 06.05.2019, Indian Bank branch Pune had intimated that the aforementioned bank guarantees are fake. On 27.05.2019, the co-accused Tusahar and applicant had submitted running bills to adjust the amount of fake guarantees. It was also found that the aforementioned bank guarantees had not been issued by both the aforementioned banks therefore, the matter was reported to the police.

4 . Learned counsel for the applicant/accused submits that the applicant has not committed the offence and he has falsely been implicated in the case. As alleged the co-accused is main accused. It is submitted that the entire money has been recovered from the co-accused Tushar therefore, there is no loss to the State. Vide order dated 24.04.2024 passed in MCRC No.13325/2024 co-accused Tushar has been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical with the co-accused Tushar. Applicant has no criminal past and he is in custody since 19.03.2024. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. Trial will take considerable long time for its disposal, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

5 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the non-applicant/State has opposed the prayer and prayed for its rejection.

Having considered the rival submissions and after perusal of the case diary so also looking to the facts that case of the present applicant is identical with co-accused Tushar , this Court is of the view that applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail, hence, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

It is directed that applicant- MOHAMMAD MUDDASAR KHAN shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with one local surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, for his appearance before the concerned Court regularly on all such dates as may be fixed in this regard during trial. It is further directed that applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 437 (3) of Cr. P. C.

This order shall be effective till the end of trial but in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective.

With the aforesaid, this application is allowed and stands disposed of. Certified copy, as per Rules.