Vinay Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No.4420 OF 2015 Vinay Singh, S/o Shri R.S.Singh, Aged about 32 years, R/o Camp-I, Road No.18, Bhilai, Dist Durg (CG) ---Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh-Through P.S. Mandir Hasoud, Raipur (CG) ---Non-applicant For Applicant :

Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate.

For-Non-applicant :

Mr.O.P.Sahu, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 22/09/2015 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.64/2015, registered at Police Station-Mandir Hasoud, District-Raipur (CG), for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC. 2.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant while working as Manager of Neha Transport, Bhilai is involved in commission of offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC along with his owner/proprietor Santosh Gupta and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant has not committed any offence and he has falsely been implicated in crime in question. He would further submit that work of the present applicant is only to issue authorization memo to receive assignment and to deliver the

assignment at particular destination and nothing more that. He would also submit that his proprietor Santosh Gupta is already in jail since 24.3.2015. The prosecution has not collected any evidence to connect the present applicant in crime in question, he is in jail since 6.7.2015 and charge-sheet has already been filed and therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that the present applicant is also involved in commission of the same offence to that of owner Santosh Gupta, who is in custody.

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 offence; role of the present applicant and material collected on behalf of the prosecution against the present applicant, 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/-