Smt. Anjum Begum And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 4116 of 2016

1. Smt. Anjum Begum, W/o Mushtaq, Aged About 39 Years, Occupation Housewife, R/o P.S. Salechowka, District - Narsinghpur (M.P.) At Present R/O. Ramnivas Talkies Raigarh, P.S. Kotwali, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

2. Ku. Uma Lodhi Patel @ Khushi @ Sonu D/O Ramesh Kumar Patel Aged About 21 Years R/o Aadegaon, P.S. Kalasali, Salechowka, District - Narsinghpur (M.P.) At Present R/O.Shanti Nagar, P.S. Kirodimalnnagar, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicants (In jail)

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Of The P.S. Kotra Road, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

---- Non-applicant ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Applicants :

Shri Abhishek Saraf, Advocate For Non-applicant/State :

Shri Neeraj Jain, GA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 08.08.2016 1) This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicants in connection with Crime No.68 of 2016, registered at PS Kotra Road, district- Raigarh (CG) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 471 and 120(B) of the IPC.

2) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, a report was made by one Snehlata Thakur that the applicants along with other co-accused have received an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (approx) on the promise to provide jobs to a group of women, thereby committed the offences as above mentioned. 3) Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants have already returned an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-

mcrc 4116 of 2016 and rest of the amount would be paid within a period of three months. A compromise has been affected between the parties to this regard. The applicants are in jail since 18.03.2016. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail. 4) Learned state counsel opposes the bail application, however, after verification, does not dispute the fact that there is a compromise between the parties; Rs.1,00,000/- has already been paid to the complainant and rest of the amount will be paid within three months.

5) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submission made by the applicants which is on record; and the fact that the applicants are in jail since 18.03.2016, I am inclined to release the applicants on bail.

7) Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety 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.

8) Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE padma