Public Prosecutors Under Duty To Read Correct Allegations As Case Diary Isn't Available During VC Bail Hearings: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed that during the video conference hearings in bail pleas, since the Courts have no access to case diaries, therefore, the duty heavily lies on the Public Prosecutor to read out the correct allegations against the accused/applicant.The Bench of Justice G. S. Ahluwalia was hearing the bail pleas filed by the applicants apprehending their arrest in connection for offence punishable under Sections 420, 120-B of IPC.The case in briefAccording to the prosecution case, a notarized agreement to sell was executed by the mother of applicant No.1 in favour of the complainant, for consideration of Rs.9,40,000/-, in respect of a property and the applicants had stood as Consentor. Thereafter, it is alleged that another notarized agreement to sell was executed by the mother of applicant No.1 in favour of her another daughter Sonam without any consideration amount, and thus, it was alleged that the complainant had been cheated by the applicants and the other co-accused persons and they had embezzled an amount of Rs.9,40,000/-. In the impugned order, it was mentioned that the allegations are that notarized sale deeds were executed.Significantly, during the course of the hearing, when the Court asked the Counsel for the state as to what was the nature of the document, he, again and again, submitted that a notarized document was executed. Thereafter, when he was asked to point out as to whether the document in question was a Notarized Sale Deed or Agreement to Sell, he submitted that a Notarized Agreement to Sell was executed.However, when he was asked to read the title of the Document, it was discovered that although the document was titled as a sale deed, and therefore, the Court said that the State Counsel was misleading the Court by submitting that a notarized agreement to sell was executed by the mother of the applicant No.1 in favour of the complainant. Against this backdrop, the Court observed thus:"There is a vast difference between an agreement to sale and a sale deed...It was really shocking that either Shri Tomar was not in a position to understand the title of the document or he was deliberately suppressing that. In both the circumstances, he has failed to discharge his duty."However, when the state counsel tendered his unconditional apology for not assisting the Court properly, the Court accepted his apology with hope and belief, that he would understand the duties attached to the office of Advocate General, the apology tendered by him is acceptedCourt's order on the bail applicationRegarding the facts of the case, the Court noted that a sale deed in respect of property worth more than Rs.100 is necessarily required to be registered and in the instant case, the applicants had admittedly stood as consentors to the sale deed executed by the mother of applicant No.1 in favour of the complainant and instead of getting it registered, the sale deed was got notarized. "Thus, it is a clear case of evasion of stamp duty also," the Court said.Further noting that if the mother had to execute a document pertaining to loan transaction, then there was no reason for her to execute a notarized sale deed in favour of her own daughter Sonam without any consideration amount, the Court denied them the bail.Case title - SMT. POONAM BHADORIYA AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHCase citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 25Click Here To Read/Download Order

Public Prosecutors Under Duty To Read Correct Allegations As Case Diary Isn't Available During VC Bail Hearings: MP High Court

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags