Rajendra Giri Goswamy And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3112 of 2016

1. Rajendra Giri Goswamy S/O Late Mani Giri Goswamy Aged About 46 Years R/O Tatibandh, Sahu Para, Behind Sheetla Mandir, Police Station - Aamanaka, Tahsil & District - Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Ritu Goswamy D/O Late Mani Giri Goswamy Aged About 40 Years R/O Tatibandh, Sahu Para, Behind Sheetla Mandir, Police Station - Aamanaka, Tahsil & District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Aplicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer - Telibandha, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicants : Mr. Siddharth Rathore, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma, Dy. Govt. Adv -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 28.06.2016

1. This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested on 5-2-2016 in connection with Crime No.5/2016 registered at Police Station Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120-B, 201, 409, 34 of IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Prize Chit and Money Ciculation Scheme Banking Act, 1978.

2. As per the prosecution case, a report was made by the complainants stating that the applicants who were working as agents of company namely Devyani Properties Ltd., collected money from customers to invest the same under varous schemes and projects with a promise to give them double amount and all of a sudden the said company was closed without giving the amount invested by the customers and responsible persons fled away from the scene and thereby the offence was committed.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that the applicants were working as agents in the said company and as per instructions given by the company they collected money from

the customers and deposited the same in the company and they have not taken a policy decision and even the present applicants also invested their amoun in the company. He would further submit that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and the applicants are in jail since 5-2-2016, therefore, they may be released on bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary and other documents.

6. Taking into consideration the nature of allegation and considering the fact that according to documents collected during investigation, the applicant were only agents of the said company and they have not taken a policy decision of the company and further considering the fact that the applicants have also invested their amount in the company, charge sheet has been filed in the case, applicants are in jail since 5-2-2016, I am inclined to release the aplicants on bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with onesurety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. They shall also appear before the trial Court as and when directed by the said Court.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Raju