High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/3827/2019allowed

Rajani Mahant And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-06-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3827 of 2019

1. Rajani Mahant W/o Shri Dharamdas Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Jalashaipara (Ranjana) Police Station Dipka, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

2. Rahmat Bai W/o Shri Krishnalal Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Jalashaipara (Ranjana) Police Station Dipka, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

3. Geeta Bai W/o Shri Heeralal Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Jalashaipara (Ranjana) Police Station Dipka, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Dipka, Tehsil Katghora, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Mr. KK Dewangan, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 19/06/2019

1. The applicants have preferred this first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with crime no. 181/2018, registered at Police Station Dipka, District Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 407 of the IPC and Section 3 & 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1957.

2. As per prosecution story, a complaint has been filed by one Sandeep Pandey, Food Inspector, wherein it has been alleged that the applicants and other co-accused persons were running fair price shop at village Ranjana, Katghora (C.G.) since September 2016. Allegedly,

in the month of June 2018 card holders/villagers were not distributed the Rashan items by the said shop and allegedly the said Rashan misappropriated by the applicants. On the basis of said report, offence has been registered. The applicants are in custody since 20.05.2019.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case due to some misunderstanding. Prima facie no offence can be made out against them, they are in custody since 20-05-2019 and trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, the applicants may be released on bail.

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

5. I have heard learned Counsel for both the parties.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution and further considering the fact that the applicants are in custody since 20-05-2019 and trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicants on bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

8. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one local solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Shubham