Ulterior Motive: Madhya Pradesh High Court Orders Inquiry Against Sessions Judge For Discharging Accused In ₹5 Crore Embezzlement Case
The case involved a computer operator in the land acquisition office, who allegedly misappropriated ₹5.10 crores through fraudulent documents.
Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has called for an inquiry and disciplinary proceedings against a Sessions Judge who discharged a government employee accused of embezzling ₹5 crore of public funds.
The case involved a computer operator in the land acquisition office, who allegedly misappropriated ₹5.10 crores through fraudulent documents.
A Bench of Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta criticized the Sessions Judge for ignoring facts and for offering the accused a chance to escape the more serious charges. The Court added, "Therefore, it appears that Ist Additional Sessions Judge has ulterior motive in holding charge under Section 406 of IPC only against the applicant to give undue advantage to him by which applicant can avail the benefit of bail."
These charges included provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for cheating (Section 420), criminal breach of trust by a public servant (Section 409), forgery (Sections 467, 468), using forged documents as genuine (Section 471), criminal conspiracy (Section 120B), abetment (Section 107), and the Prevention of Corruption Act (Section 13(1)(A)).
Advocate Rabindra Kumar Mishra appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Abhishek Bhadoriya appeared for the Respondent.
Background
The case stemmed from the embezzlement of public funds related to land acquisition in Shivpuri District. Petitioner was employed as a computer operator and allegedly diverted ₹5.10 crores to his personal accounts by manipulating official documents. Despite his first bail application being dismissed on merits in August 2024, and his second bail plea withdrawn in January 2025, the accused had made several attempts to obtain bail. His third and fourth bail applications were granted briefly, but the Court ultimately rejected his fifth bail application.
The accused's defense claimed that the issue was not embezzlement, but a case of unequal distribution of compensation for land acquisition. However, the prosecution maintained that he had illegally transferred public money into his own accounts by abusing his position. The State also informed the Court that he had set fire to revenue records related to the case, for which a separate FIR had been filed.
Finding
The High Court took particular note of the lack of any evidence proving that his land was involved in the acquisition process, which he allegedly claimed as the reason for the money he received.
The Court ordered, "A copy of this order be sent to the Principal Registrar (Vigilance), High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Principal Seat, Jabalpur and to put up the same before the Hon'ble Chief Justice, High Court of Madhya Pradesh seeking permission for conducting an inquiry and for taking disciplinary action against Ist Additional Sessions Judge (Shri Vivek Sharma), Shivpuri who had discharged the present applicant from the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 107 of IPC without considering the facts of the case and to give undue advantage to the applicant to get benefit of bail.”
Furthermore, the High Court dismissed the applicant’s fifth attempt at bail.
Cause Title: Roop Singh Parihar v. The State of Madhya Pradesh, [2025:MPHC-GWL:21580]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates Rabindra Kumar Mishra and Shivendra Singh Raghuvanshi
Respondent: Advocate Abhishek Bhadoriya