Rohit @ Kakku Dixit vs State

Heard on this secondapplication for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed on behalf of petitioner Rohit @ Kakku Dixit in

Crime No.306/2017 registered by Police Station City Kotwali, District Chhatarpur under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B read with Section 34 of

the Indian Penal Code.

His first application for the same relief had been dismissed by this Court by order dated 01.03.2018 passed in M.Cr.C.No.8281/2018 as withdrawn

with liberty to renew the prayer at a later stage of the trial.

By way of change in circumstances for this second application for bail, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is prepared

to deposit the amount allegedly extracted by him.

As per the prosecution case, complainant Prakash Chandra Dixit had his ancestral property in village Narayanpura Tehsil Bijawar. He was living

for a long time in Mahoba (Uttar Pradesh). His nephew present petitioner Rohit Dixit, taking advantage of the prolonged absence of complainant,

entered into a conspiracy to execute a registered sale-deed of 8 acres of land belonging to complainant Prakash Chandra Dixit. He got one unknown

person impersonate Prakash Chandra Dixit and got the registered sale-deed executed in favour of Mansingh, Durgadas and Rajkumar. Co-accused

persons Manohar and Bandu alias Bantu Jain stood as witnesses, who identified the aforesaid impersonator as Prakash Chandra Dixit. Consideration

of Rs.22 lacs in cash and 2 lacs by way of cheque was paid by Mansingh, Durgadas and Rajkumar to the impersonator; as such, they lost Rs.24

lacs.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that in order to

demonstrate his bona fides, petitioner is prepared to deposit a sum of Rs.24 lacs before the trial Court under protest. The petitioner has been in

custody since 13.01.2018; therefore, it has been prayed that the petitioner be released on conditional bail.

Learned Government Advocate for the respondent /State on the other hand, has opposed the bail application mainly on the ground that petitioner Rohit

is the principal accused in the case. Keeping in view the gravity of allegations leveled against the petitioner, he should not be allowed to be released on

bail in spite of his offer to deposit the entire amount.

However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case in their entirety, particularly the offer made by the petitioner and in order to secure

the amount of which the victims have been cheated, in the opinion of this Court, petitioner deserves to be released on conditional bail.

Consequently, this second application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal procedure filed on behalf of the petitioner Rohit @ Kakku

Dixit is conditionally allowed.

It is directed that on petitioner’s depositing a sum of Rs.24 lacs before the trial Court and on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.

1,00,000/- with a local solvent surety in the same amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before that Court on all dates fixed in

the case and for complying with the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he shall be released on

conditional bail.

It is further directed that the amount so deposited by the petitioner before the trial Court, shall be kept in fixed deposit in a nationalized bank at the

discretion of the trial Court so as to earn maximum rate of interest. The entire amount including the interest, shall be payable to the person/persons

found entitled thereto in the judgment of the trial Court.

Certified Copy as per rules.