Pardeshi Ram Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3486 of 2020 • Pardeshi Ram Sahu S/o Sirmu @ Sirbhu Ram Sahu, aged about 40 yeras, R/o Village Bhendsar, P.S. Bhkhara, District Dhamtari (C.G.) Present Address Devpuri Meena Goyal House No. 21 Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through the Police Station Amleshwar, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicant.

:

Mr. Tarun Dansena, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 14.08.2020

1. Heard.

2. Admit.

3. The applicant has filed this Second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No. 100/2017 registered at Police Station : Amleshwar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409 & 120-B of the IPC, Section 10 of C.G. Protection of Depositors Interest Act and Sections 3 & 4 of Chit Fund Act.

4. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn by this Hon'ble Court on 02.03.2020

passed in MCRC No. 7634/2019 and a liberty was given to file the same after examination of the material witnesses.

5. As per the prosecution case, applicant being agent of Suvidha Farming and Alaid Co. Ltd along with the coaccused persons induced complainant and others to make deposit in the schemes of the company promising attractive returns, against which bonds were issued, but bonds were not honoured. Based on this, offence has been registered against the applicant and he has been arrested

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that applicant is in jail since 13.07.2019 due to the pandemic disease COVID -19, there is no possibility of expeditious trial, he ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the conditions and directions, which may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court, therefore, he may be released on bail.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application.

8. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the detention period of the applicant, and further considering that as trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release him on bail.

10. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 11.It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one local surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Vijay Sahu