Rajendra Singh Sisodiya v. State Of Chhattisgarh
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 569 of 2020 Rajendra Singh Sisodiya, S/o Shri Ram Singh Sisodiya, Aged about 42 years, R/o Jamunia Shankar, P.S. Barkheda, District Ratlaam (M.P.) ---- Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through; The District Magistrate, Durg (C.G.) ----- Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :
Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate For Respondent/State :
Mr. Ayaz Naved, G.A.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 25/06/2020
1. The accused/applicants has moved these first bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for their release on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.122/2017, registered at Police Station - Mohan Nagar, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409 of IPC. And Sections 3, 4 , 5 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978).
2. It is the case of the prosecution that applicant and other accused persons were alleged of offence defined a criminal breach of trust by virtue of getting amounts at large invested in a company known as Arogya Dhanwarsha Developers Allied Ltd. Company with an assurance of higher returns, which was not carried out on maturity of schemes concerned. The applicant was stated to be a director of the company, whereas he was not placed in such capacity. Based on this, offence has been registered. The present
applicants are in custody since 04.04.2017.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the applicant is in custody since 04.04.2017 and charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, therefore, he may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the nature of offence and further considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 04.04.2017, charge sheet has been filed and there is no likelihood of his case being decided in near future, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which, the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail.
7. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed.
8. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- with one local surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed, till the disposal of the trial.
9. It is made clear that if the applicant has already been
released on bail pursuant to the bail bonds already furnished in view of the order passed by the High Power Committee constituted in compliance of the order of the Supreme Court of India dated 23.3.2020 in the matter of In Re : Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in Prisons (Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 1/2020), he need not furnish bail bond afresh and the bail bond already furnished shall be deemed to be the bail bond furnished in compliance of the order of this Court, but if he has not furnished the bail bond earlier, then he will be required to furnish bail bond within four weeks from today.
10.Certified copy, as per rules.
Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Nadim