Ramchand v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3694 of 2016 • Raman S/o Netram Pal Aged About 40 Years Occupation Labour, R/o Village & Post Temri, Police Station - Nandghat, Civil And Rev. Distt. Bemetara Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Nandghat, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent MCRC No. 3695 of 2016 • Ramchand S/o Netram Pal Aged About 42 Years Occupation Labour, R/o Village & Post Temri, Police Station - Nandghat, Civil And Rev. Distt. Bemetara Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate/ Station House Officer, Police Station Nandghat, District - Bemetara Chhattisgarh.
--- Respondent For the applicants:
: Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Anil S. Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 14.07.2016
1. These are two bail applications filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicants in connection with Crime No. 82/2016 registered at P.S. Nandghat, Distt. Bemetara (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 of IPC & Sec. 66-B of Information & Technology Act.
2. Since both these bail applications are relating to the same crime number, they are decided together by this common order.
3. As per the prosecution case, a report was made by the
Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, Temri Branch against earlier Branch Manager that certain amount for crop insurance which came to the Branch, the former Branch Manager, Buddhi Prakash Bangade transferred it to different account holders and thereafter withdrew the same on the basis of withdrawal form signed by the account holder and befitted himself to the extent of Rs.18,59,741/-.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the charge sheet has been filed and the applicants are in jail since 11.03.2016 and primarily the entire allegations are against Buddhi Prakash who is the earlier Branch Manager and virtually it is stated that the applicants themselves have been deceived. It is further submitted that the applicants are labourers and similarly placed accused have been granted regular bail by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.3360 of 2016 on 07.07.2016 & M.Cr.C.No.2885/2016 on 16.06.2016, It is also submitted that the charge sheet in this case has been filed and no further investigation is required, therefore, they may be enlarged on bail.
5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail. However, he do not dispute the fact that similarly placed accused have been enlarged on bail by this Court.
6. Perused the case diary and the charge sheet. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of allegations leveled against the applicants and further taking into the facts that the charge sheet in these cases has been filed and no further investigation is necessary and similarly placed accused have been enlarged on bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 3360 of 2016 on 07.07.2016 and M.Cr.C. No. 2885/2016 on 16.06.2016 and further looking to the period of detention as the applicants are stated to be in jail since
11.3.2016, I am inclined to release them on bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed and the applicants Raman and Ramchand are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. They shall also appear before the trial Court as and when directed by the said Court.
C.c. as per rules.
Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o