Jeevatram Tolwani & ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 1744 of 2020

1. Jeevatram Tolwani S/o Late Uttamchandra Tolwani Aged About 62 Years R/o Sector-1, C-22, Bajaj Colony, Raipur, Tehsil And DistrictRaipur, C.G.

2. Rajkumar Tolani, S/o Late Pohumal Tolani, aged about 51 years R/O Kashyap Colony, Lane No.4, Bilaspur, Tehsil and District- Bilaspur, C.G. ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Sho, Ps- Telibandha, District- Raipur, C.G.

---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Otwani, Advocate.

For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sudeep Agrawal, Dy.A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 15-05-2020

1. Heard on the application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 21.02.2020 in connection with Crime No.527/2017, registered at Police StationTelibandha, District- Raipur, C.G. for offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of I.P.C.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are in jail since 21.02.2020 and have been falsely implicated in this case. The main accused Ramesh Tolani in this case has been granted anticiptory bail by the Sessions Court, whereas these applicants were only the attesting witnesses in the agreement which is said to be forged.

-2Hence, it is prayed that applicants be granted bail.

3. Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

5. According to prosecution case, co-accused Ramesh Tolani entered into an agreement with one Mr. Anil Rochlani for purchase of property which was attested by these applicants. Subsequently, it was disclosed in the investigation in the complaint filed by Jeevat Ram that the signature of Anil Rochlani was forged. Hence, this case.

6. Considering that the main accused in this case is already benefitted with grant of anticiptory bail, therefore, there is no further requirement of detention of these applicants in custody. Therefore, I feel inclined to allow this application.

7. Consequently, this application filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail is hereby allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, for their appearance as and when directed.

8. Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Monika Judge