Ambikeshwar Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 543 of 2016 • Ambikeshwar Singh S/o Late Shri Awadh Bihari Singh Aged About 55 Years Cast Kushwaha, R/o Sonamani Collary, P.S. Chirimiri, Tehsil Khadgawan, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh through Thana Incharge, Thana Khadgawan, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. - Respondent For the applicant :
Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate For the Respondent :
Mrs. Shobha Kashyap, Dy.G.A.
For the complainant : Mr. M.K. Sinha, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 11.08.2016
1. Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 58 of 2016 registered at Police Station Khadgawan, Distt. Korea (C.G) for the offences punishable under section 420, 467, 34 of IPC, the applicant has filed this application u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.
2. As per the prosecution case, a complaint was made by one Sachin Sinha that an agreement was executed between him and the applicant on 06.01.2015 for sale of land bearing Kh.No. 1606/02 admeasuring 0.08 hectares and at that time, Rs.1,50,000/- was paid and on 18.02.2015 another sale deed was executed for sale of land bearing Kh.1606/01 admeasuring 0.25 hectares whereas for the rest of land it was agreed by separate agreement that it would be sold within a further period that is by April 2015. Thereafter sale deed was executed and the applicant did not execute the sale in respect of the remaining
land and instead, the applicant has executed another sale deed in favour of third person by taking out another Rin-pustika thereby the offence is committed.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that initially the sale deed was executed on 18.02.2015 and though the sale consideration of Rs.5 lakhs in total was paid but the sale of land of Rs.6,63,500/- was made and the complainant was obliged to make payment till April 2015 which he did not pay. It is further submitted that since the marriage of daughter of applicant was ensuing he has to meet the requirements of marriage, therefore, despite his request within the stipulated time when the sale deed was not executed, the land was sold to another one. It is submitted that according to the own showing of complainant, there was breach of sale agreement and hence the nature of dispute is civil nature and as such no criminality can be attributed to the applicant.
4. Per contra, learned State Counsel as also learned counsel for the objector oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that after agreement dated 18.02.2015 the applicant has received certain amount in advance from complainant and thereafter sold the land to someone else and different sale consideration was received from third person thereby the applicant has committed cheating.
5. Perused the documents annexed to the bail application which would go to show that within stipulated time, the sale could not be executed and thereby prima facie it appears that breach of sale agreement was committed which necessarily raises a dispute of civil nature. Thus considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the applicant can be granted the benefit of section 438
Cr.P.C., can be granted in favour of the applicant.
6. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, he shall be released on bail by the officer arresting him on his executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer arresting him or the concerned Investigating Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :- (i) that he shall make himself available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required;
(ii) that he 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 any police officer;
(iii) that he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
C.c. as per rules.
Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o