Smt. Swati Agrawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 627 of 2018 • Smt. Swati Agrawal W/o Deepak Kumar Agrawal, Aged About 34 Years, Caste- Agrawal, R/o- Ward No. 07, Sakti, P.S. And Tahsil- Sakti, DistrictJanjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police StationSakti, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant For Applicant - Smt. Indira Tripathi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State - Shri Ashok Swarnkar, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 13-07-2018 1.

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.262/2018, registered at Police Station - Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh for offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC, the applicant has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail.

2.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, the matter against this applicant should have been prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, instead of that, the complainant has lodged the FIR registering the offence under Section 420 of the IPC. Apart from that, no case is made out against this applicant as the cheques which were issued by her that were dishonoured by the bank, have been encashed later on by the complainant after deposit made by the applicant subsequent to the notice issued to this applicant. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant may be benefited with grant of anticipatory bail. 3.

Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application. 4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5.

The allegation against this applicant is this that she issued four cheques in favour of the complainant regarding purchase of land for payment of

-2Rs.16,87,000/-. As the cheques were dishonoured by the bank, a complaint has been lodged against this applicant.

6.

Perused the documents attached with the application in which the account statement of the applicant has also been submitted which shows withdrawal of the amount of the given cheques. Apart from that, it is clearly a case which should have been prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Hence, for these reasons, I am of this view that this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, she shall be released on bail by the officer arresting her on executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :

(i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) that the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Aadil