Praveena vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Submissions were made on application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, which is first application in Crime No.402/2018 in respect of

offences under Section 417, 420, 466, 468, 506, 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The prosecution story in short is that complainant filed a written complaint to the effect and that she and the applicant were acquainted with each

other. The applicant persuaded the complainant to purchase agricultural lands in different survey numbers totaling 1.16 hectares belonging to Dilip

Gupta and Praveen Modi (co-accused) and this purchase was to be joint purchase by complainant and applicant. However, it was a complainant who

has paid 82.00 lacs rupees in cash and a agreement of sale was got executed. However, as per allegations, the applicant got the registry of the land in

her own name and not joint names of complainant and applicant. Consequently, complainant exerted pressure upon the applicant due to which on

28.08.2014 applicant executed a sale agreement in favour of the complainant showing consideration of the sale at Rs.26,10,000/-. However, this was

not allowed by registration of sale deed in favour of complainant and instead applicant gave her cheques of different banks, even though there was no

money deposited in such banks. On 23.05.2018, the complainant again asked the applicant to execute registered sale deed but applicant stated that she

has sold off the land to one Rajesh Pathak and refused to execute the sale deed.

Responding to the complaint matter was investigated while chargesheet against the applicant and her husband has been filed, matter is still under

investigation regarding in respect of co-accused Dilip Kumar Gupta and Praveen Modi.

Learned counsel has submitted that in this matter the complainant was although allegedly cheated by the applicant in the year 2013-14, written

complaint by her was filed after four years in the year 2018. It is also been stated that although in agreement dated 07.09.2013 in para-4 it had been

agreed that the registered sale deed shall be executed that after 07.11.2014 but instead of waiting till 07.11.2014, agreement dated 28.08.2014 has

been shown to be executed which is denied and thus it is stated that such document is not reliable. It has further been stated that a huge amount of

Rs.82.00 lacs have been shown to be paid in cash by complainant which is highly improbable and at last it has been stated that other fictitious cases

have also been registered against the applicant in all of which she has been granted bail and that applicant being lady having two minor children be

given the benefit of bial in the matter.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has submitted that the applicant along with other co-accused persons are a gang of cheats and have duped

number of unsuspecting complainants who have been cheated of lacs of rupees which they had pain stakingly acquired through out their life.

The learned counsel for applicant submitted copies of bail orders in respect of other cases registered against the applicant. A perusal of orders of bail

in other matters such as crime nos.337/2016 and 95/2018 show that in those matters as well the complainants were ladies who had paid cash amounts

and as per allegations they had been cheated of their life times earnings by applicant by way of adopting similar modus-operandi. Applicant and her

husband allegedly have cheated the complainants in those matters.

As far as the present case is concerned there may be some chinks in the case of prosecution such as cash transaction and belated complaint,

however, looking to her antecedents involving similar modus-operandi with different complainants, it would not be appropriate to enlarge the applicant

on bail at this juncture when investigation under Section 173(8) of Code of Criminal Procedure against co-accused is still going on. The applicant shall

have liberty to file application after completion of such investigation. Presently, this application at this stage is rejected.