Siddharth Mishra v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3784 of 2020 • Siddharth Mishra, S/o Late Neetiraj Mishra, aged about 45 years, R/o Village Pratappur Near Naka Ring Road Ambikapur, P.S. Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ---- Applicant
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through the Station House Officer, Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicant.
:
Mr. Manoj Paranjape, Advocate.
For Respondent/State :
Mr. H. S. Ahluwalia, Dy. A.G.
For Objector :
Mr. A. K. Prasad, Advocate.
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 10.08.2020
1. Heard on admission.
2. Admit.
3. The applicant has filed this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No. 246/2020 registered at Police Station : Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 34, 120-B of the IPC.
4. The prosecution story in short is that the complainant Alok Jaiswal lodged a complaint against the co-accused Ramadhar Jaiswal alleging therein that without cancelling the sale deed agreement from the
complainant, the main accused Ramadhar Jaiswal entered into separate agreement with present applicant and other co-accused persons. Based on that, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submitted that the said amount has been dealt with by main accused Ramadhar Jaiswal, the present applicant have no role in the above mentioned crime. He further submits that the other co-accused person have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Hon'ble Court on 26.06.2020 passed in MCRCA Nos. 730/2020 & 644/2020. He next added in his submission that the applicant is in jail since 03.06.2020 and he is 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.
6. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the Objector opposes the bail application.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, fact that
other co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, as the applicant is in jail since 03.06.2020 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.
9. Accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the said Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court.
Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Vijay Sahu