Chandrakant Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 152 of 2019 • Chandrakant Verma S/o Late Shri Munnalal Verma, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Nandauri ,tahsil Dhamdha, Police Station Purani Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chhawni District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent __________________________________________________________________ For Applicant : Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Shri K.K. Dewangan, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 18/03/2019

1. The Applicant has preferred first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 743/2016, registered at Police Station - Chhawni, DistrictDurg, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC.

2. As per the prosecution story, allegedly, present Applicant has obtained Rs. 11,50,000/- from the Complainant Nandkumar Sharma for providing job in Bhilai Steel Plant but neither job was provided nor the said amount was refunded. It was further alleged that the Applicant has given one forged appointment letter to the Complainant also. On the basis of the said, offence has been registered and Applicant has been taken into custody on 09.12.2016.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case due to some dispute. He further submits that out of total 12 witnesses only

four have been examined before the Trial Court till date. None of the witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution. He further submits that Applicant has no previous antecedents, he is in custody since 09.12.2016 and trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he may be released on bail.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence collected by the prosecution and further considering the fact that the Applicant is in custody since 09.12.2016 and trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release him on bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

8. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Prakash