Rishikesh Agrawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 506 of 2021 • Rishikesh Agrawal S/o late Munnilal Agrawal, aged about 58 years, R/o near Baba Sweets, New Khursipar, Bhilai, P.S. Khursipar, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through : Police Station Supela, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.).
---- Respondent For Applicant :
Mr. Shrawan Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent :
Mr. B.P. Banjare, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board /07/2021 1.
The matter is heard through video conferencing. 2.
This application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime Number 123/2021 registered at Police Station Supela, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.
3.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant namely Sarita Agrawal, wife of the applicant, got 85.40 sq. meter plot on the basis of Will executed by the mother of the applicant. The allegation against the present applicant is that he obtained loan of Rs.26,50,000/- from A.I. Small Finance Bank Limited, Supela by making forged signature of complainant. Based on this, offence has been registered against the
applicant.
4.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the property is an ancestral one and the WILL itself executed by the mother of the applicant in favour of his wife Sarita Agrawal. He also submits that there is strange relation between the complainant and the applicant and the present FIR has been lodged after being provoked by the family members of his wife. Learned counsel also submits that the applicant is ready to abide by all the conditions and directions which may be imposed by the Hon'ble Court while granting anticipatory bail. Therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail. 5.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.
6.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
7.
The material on record would reveal that the complainant got the ancestral property on the basis of WILL executed by applicant's mother.
8.
After hearing counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the nature of offence, without commenting anything on merit of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 9.
Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with aforesaid crime number, he shall be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting/investigating ofÏcer or the court concerned, as the case may be, with the following terms and conditions: (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation/medical examination before the concerned investigating ofÏcer as and when required;
(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer; (iii) that the applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) PKD Judge