Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 425 (MP)

Ram Mahesh Sharma v. State Of M. P.

2015-04-13

SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA, U.C.MAHESHWARI

body2015
ORDER : U. C. MAHESHWARI, J. On behalf of the applicant, this petition is preferred under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail to the applicant as he is in custody since 9-12-2014 in connection with Crime No. 449/2013 registered at Police Station Jhansi Road, Gwalior for the offences of sections 419, 420, 468, 471 read with sections 120-B and 201 of Indian Penal Code and sections 3/4 of the Madhya Pradesh Recognised Examinations Act. 2. Applicant's counsel after taking us through the papers placed on the record argued that the applicant himself has not committed any alleged offence, but he has been falsely implicated in the matter by fabricating the false story. In continuance he said that as per the allegations of the prosecution, the applicant being the father of Avnish Sharma had managed the affairs through racketeer Deepak Yadav in consideration of Rs. Five Lakhs to manage the admission of his aforesaid son in the medical course by breaking the system of the competitive examination of the PMT through solver while mere perusal of the case diary it is apparent that there is no any admissible or reliable evidence against the applicant. In continuance he said that for the sake of argument, if it is deemed that the applicant had provided some money to his son for his education or to get admission in medical course, even then it could not be said that he had committed any of the alleged offence. In continuance, he said that looking to the nature of the offence, taking into consideration his custody since 9-12-2014 till today, so also taking into consideration that he is a heart patient, he should be released on bail, otherwise any unhappy incident may take place with him in jail. In support of the argument, he has also referred the papers of the charge sheet filed against him. In continuance, he said that on extending the benefit of bail to the applicant he will abide all the terms and conditions which would be imposed by the court under discretionary jurisdiction and prayed to allow this petition. 3. In support of the argument, he has also referred the papers of the charge sheet filed against him. In continuance, he said that on extending the benefit of bail to the applicant he will abide all the terms and conditions which would be imposed by the court under discretionary jurisdiction and prayed to allow this petition. 3. On the other hand, opposing the aforesaid prayer with the assistance of the case diary, the State counsel submits that the applicant being father of the aforesaid student had managed the affairs under criminal conspiracy with Deepak Yadav, who after obtaining Rupees Five Lakhs from the applicant had managed the affairs to secure the seat for the aforesaid son of the applicant in medical course through some solver, who appeared on behalf of such son in the alleged competitive PMT Examination held by the VYAPAM and thereby the applicant with the assistance of the racketeer Deepak Yadav has committed very serious offence, by which he has not only broken the law but he has also deprived those genuine students, who appeared in the alleged examination on the basis of their own labour and study, but could not get success, because of the offending activities of the persons like the applicant and other racketeers, in getting the admission in the medical course at their proper age to make their career. He further said that the supplementary investigation of the case in respect of the co-accused of the matter is still going on and as per the law settled by this Court in the matter of Sudhir Sharma vs. State of M. P. unless after holding the supplementary investigation in the matter against all the other co-accused the charge sheets are filed, the applicant could not be released on bail and prayed to dismiss this petition. 4. Having heard the counsel, keeping in view the arguments advanced, on perusal of the case diary as well as the charge sheet, we have found sufficient prima facie circumstances against the applicant to show his involvement in the alleged offence, whereby he has not only broken the established system of the VYAPAM for holding the PMT Examination but by such act he has also deprived to those genuine and bona fide students, who appeared in the alleged examination on the basis of their own labour and study. As such due to the offending activity of the persons like the applicant and other racketeers, such students could not succeed in getting admission in the medical course at their proper age to make their future, so, in such circumstances merely on account of filing the charge sheet against the applicant he does not deserve for grant of bail. In any case, in view of the aforesaid cited case unless after holding supplementary investigation against all other co-accused of the impugned crime, the charge sheet or appropriate report in that regard are not submitted, the applicant could not be released on bail. 5. So far the argument of the applicant's counsel that the applicant is suffering from heart disease is concerned, in the available circumstances, the jail authority through State counsel is hereby directed to provide the best treatment to the applicant in the jail and if it is necessary, then he be also sent to the expert doctor of State Hospitals for medical examination and treatment. However, in the available circumstances, the applicant is extended a liberty to revive the prayer soon after filing the supplementary charge sheet or any other reports in that regard against all the co-accused of the impugned case. 6. In view of the aforesaid, the petition is hereby dismissed as indicated above but with the aforesaid observation, liberty and direction.