Yogesh Dewangan, v. State Of Chhattisgarh,
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 580 of 2021 • Yogesh Dewangan, son of Bhairav Prasad Dewangan, aged about 24 years, resident of Sarangpal, Tahsil and District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ---- Applicant
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh - Through : Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicant :
Mr. D. Kushwaha, Advocate.
For Respondent. :
Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, G.A.
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board /06/2021 1.
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 112/2021 registered at Police Station - Kanker, District North Bastar, Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 34 of Indian Penal Code.
2.
The allegation against the present applicant is that he along with co-accused person committed fraud of Rs.2,32,813/- while working in complainant's Hero Honda Servicing Shop. Based on this, offence has been registered against the applicant.
3.
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 applicant was working
in the complainant's showroom in the capacity of Cashier and he left the job on 10.03.2021 after finalizing the transactions and also handed over all the documents. The applicant has not embezzled any amount of the showroom, therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail.
4.
Counsel for the State however opposes the application for anticipatory bail. Learned State counsel submits that there is documentary evidence against the applicant which shows that while working in the showroom he has committed fraud to the tune of Rs.2,32,813/-.
5.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence and further considering the quality of evidence against the applicant, I am not inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail.
7.
Accordingly, the application is rejected.
Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) pkd Judge