Mohammad Ansaar & ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 166 of 2020

1. Mohammad Ansaar, son of Late Shri Mohammad Sarwar, aged about 54 years,

2. Mohammad Mansur, son of Mohammad Ansaar, aged about 24 years Both are resident of Ward No.04, Nayapara Mahasamund, Tehsil and District Mahasamund, (CG) ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Sargaon, Mungeli, District Mungeli, (CG) ---- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Shri UKS Chandel, Advocate.

For Non-Applicant : Shri Vikram Sharma, GA.

For Objector : Shri RK Pali, Advocate.

Proceeding through Video Conferencing Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 17/06/2020 :

1. The applicants have preferred this bail applications for grant of anticipatory bail as they apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.09/2020, registered at Police Station Sargaon, Mungeli District Mungeli for offences punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506 and 392/34 of the IPC.

2. The applicant No.1 is the owner of the subject truck, which was agreed to be sold to the complainant, however, the complainant was not paying the installments to the finance company, therefore, the applicants were entitled to obtain possession of the truck in terms of para-3 of the agreement (Annexure-A/3).

3. Although there is allegation of loot of the truck, but considering the ownership documents (Annexure-A/2) and agreement (Annexure-A/3), there appears transactional dispute between the parties. Therefore, considering the entire fact situation of the case, the applicants are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

4. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer with the following conditions:- (i) they shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

(ii) they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Barve