Chandrakant Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 3163 OF 2015 Chandrakant Verma, aged about 35 years, S/o Late Shri Chhote Kumar Verma, R/o Chandrashekhar Nagar, Ashwani Nagar, Police Station Puranibasti, Raipur, Tahsil and District-Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---Non-applicant For Applicant :

Mr. S.C.Verma, Advocate For Non-applicant :

Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Deputy Advocate General For Complainant ;

Mr.P.P.Sahu, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal CAV ORDER 07/08/2015 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.121/2013, registered at Police Station-Gudhiyari, Raipur, District Raipur (CG), for the offence punishable under Sections 408, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC. 2.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, the applicant in collusion with co-accused Vikas Chandak misappropriated the amount of Rs.16,40,129/- and thereby committed the aforesaid offence. 3.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant has not committed any offence and has falsely been implicated in the case. The amount in question only used by the present applicant on being deposited by co-accused Vikas Chandak, in fact, he could be the best witness, but the

prosecution has chosen to array him as an accused. He would further submit that applicant is in jail since 12.5.2015 and charge-sheet has already been filed.

4.

Learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that cheque of Dharam Das Meghani given to co-accused Vikas Chandak for depositing tax and other purpose was interpolated and some amount was deposited in the account of the present applicant, which he has misappropriated, therefore, bail may not be granted to him. 5.

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

6.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case; further taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence and the manner in which the applicant in conspiracy with the co-accused misappropriated the huge amount of Rs.16,40,129/- of the complainant, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on regular bail. 7.

Accordingly, bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is rejected.

8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE B/-