Jaggu Ram Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh
Page No.1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 1226 of 2018 • Jaggu Ram Verma S/o Shatrughan Verma Aged About 40 Years R/o.- Village-Dongridih, (Lawan), Police Station-Kasdol, Civil And Revenue District- Balodabazar (C.G.), District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Kotwali, DistrictRajnandgaon (C.G.), District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent __________________________________________________________ For Applicant :
Mr. Adil Minhaj, Advocate.
For Respondent/State :
Mr. Anil S. Pandey, Govt. Advocate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order On Board 17/04/2018
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.179/2017, registered at Police Station- Kotwali, District - Rajnandgaon(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in this case. Mark-sheet of 5th Class of this applicant was firstly verified in the year 2004 by the department and report was received that the mark-sheet is correct. Subsequent to that second verification was made in the year 2009 from the District Education
Page No.2 Officer, Raipur, in which it was reported that the no student having the name of this applicant had appeared in the year 1989 from Primary School, Saragaon. Third report was called in the year 2014, in which, it was stated by DEO, Raipur that the records are not available. Subsequent to that false FIR has been lodged. Applicant is in jail since 12.12.2017 and he is ready to abide by all the conditions and direction, which may be imposed while granting bail to him. Hence, it is prayed that applicant be enlarged on regular bail.
3. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submissions made in this respect. It is submitted that no case is made out for grant of bail.
4. Heard both the parties and perused the case diary.
5. According to the prosecution case, the applicant presented mark-sheet of 5th Class of their primary school, Saragaon, for his appointment as Dispensary Assistant in Ayurved Department. Subsequent to his appointment verification of his mark-sheet was made thrice and and finding positive report FIR was lodged against him.
6. Considered on the entire material present in the case diary, it is submitted by counsel for applicant that the mention of the name of this applicant on the mark-sheet has some difference which has been made a ground of the prosecution. Applicant has to explain the same and defend his case.
7. As presently the case is before the trial Court and the trial against the applicant is likely to take some more time for its conclusion. No purpose would be served to keep the applicant in detention till the conclusion of trial, hence, for this reason, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant.
Page No.3
8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, for his appearance as and when directed.
Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Nisha