Uttam Majumdar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 332 of 2020 • Uttam Majumdar S/o Gaourango Majumdar Aged About 48 Years R/o Vasudeva Para Lakhagarh, Police Station And Tahsil Pithoura, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Pithoura, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Sudhir Sahu, Advocate For Respondent :

Shri Sameer Sharma, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 27/02/2020 1.

The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.205/2019, registered at Police Station - Pithoura, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) read with section 34 IPC. 2.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant Angita Yadav made a written report at Police Station Pithora alleging therein that the present applicant has taken Rs.20,000/- for making lease of land and committed forgery. Further case is that on the memorandum of the applicant, some Kisan Books, pass books of many banks, kisan credit card, rubber

seal of Tahsildar Pithoura, Secretary Gram Panchayat Beldih, Revenue Inspector, Pithoura and Manager, Agriculture Cooperative Society Pithoura have also been seized from him. Based on this, offence has been registered. The present applicant has been taken into custody on 26.10.2019. 3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that only on the memorandum statement of the applicant, he has been arrested and there is no allegation against the present applicant that he prepared the forged rin pustika. He also submits that vide order dated 24.01.2020 passed in MCRC Nos. 7947/2019 and other connected matter and on 10.01.2020 in MCRC Nos.7289/2019 and other connected matters, the co-accused persons have been enlarged on bail. It is next submitted that the present applicant is in custody since 26.10.2019, the charge sheet has been filed and there is no likelihood of his case being decided in near future. Therefore, he may be released on bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application. He submits that the name of applicant finds place in written complaint, FIR and some forge seal of Tahsildar, Revenue Inspector and Manager of Krishi Cooperative Society have also been seized from him. Therefore, bail may not be granted to the applicant. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence and further considering the fact that other co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.7947/2019, 8146/2019, 7289/2019, 7638/2019 and 8449/2019, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

7.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8.

It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one local surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Certified copy, as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Pekde