B. S. R. Shastri v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 828 of 2015 B. S. R. Shastri S/o Late B.N. Murthi Aged About 53 Years R/o Plot No. 403, Matri Heritage, Ispat Nagar, Post Risali, Bhilai, Tahsil And District - Durg (Chhattisgarh). ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through : District Magistrate, Durg, District - Durg (Chhattisgarh).

---- Respondent Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, counsel for the petitioner/s. Shri Ashok Swarnakar, Panel Lawyer for the State. Order On Board 04/09/2015 Heard.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.34/2015 registered at police station - Bhilai Bhatthi, Distt. - Durg (CG) for alleged commission of offence under Section 420, 467, 468/34 of IPC. 2.

Prosecution case is that the applicant and other co-accused, in order to cheat the purchaser, made fraudulent representation that under a fake future public scheme operating in the name of wife of co-accused, money may be deposited for supply of steel scrap from Bhilai Steel Plant of which, the applicant and co-accused are the employees.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in so far as the applicant is concerned, the allegation of he being involved in this fraudulent misrepresentation is false. The so called company stands in the name of wife of the co-accused and Rs.22 lakhs was directly deposited in her account. The concerned purchaser, who did not receive supply, had malafide involved the applicant in the transaction that the applicant was also operating along with the co-accused and his wife to cheat. 4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that from the statement of

the intending purchaser, it is clear that the applicant was also actively involved in inducing the purchaser to pay huge amount to the wife of co-accused by giving assurance that he will supply steel scrap to the purchaser. 5.

Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the parties and nature of allegations, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. The application is therefore rejected.

Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Deepti