High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/694/2016rejected

Tukaram Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-03-28Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Misc. Criminal Case No.694 of 2016 Tukaram Patel, S/o Bhukhan Lal Patel, aged about 27 years, R/o Village Darchura, Post Office & Police Station Simga, District BalodabazarBhatapara (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali, District Dhamtari (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant:

Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate.

For Non-applicant:

Mr. D.R. Minj, Deputy Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 28/03/2016

1. The accused/applicant has moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.258/2015, registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Distt. Dhamtari, for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 409 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that M/s. Sanjeevani Producer Company Limited has raised huge public money without prior permission of Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) promising to double the amount and thereby committed the offence. The matter has been reported by Ravi Vishwakarma.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the

case. The applicant is Manager of the said Company, he has not collected any amount and he has only worked as Manager in the said Company. The applicant is in jail since 21-9-2015. Chargesheet has been filed.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the application and submits that the applicant worked as Manager of the Company and has collected amount on behalf of the Company, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

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

6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence, facts and circumstances of the case, role of the applicant and the applicant is said to have collected amount on behalf of the Company, I do not find any ground for grant of bail to the applicant. The application is rejected.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma