Budhram @ Rahul v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No.
of 2015 • Budhram @ Rahul, son of Girvar Janghel, aged about 25 years, R/o. Village Gopalpur, at present Pipariya (Khairagarh), P.S. And Tahsil Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, P.S. City Kotwali, Bemetara, District Bemetara (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant:
Mr. C.K. Kesharwani, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State: Mr. Anant Bajpai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board /0 8 /2015 Heard.
(1) The accused/applicant has moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 323/2015 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Bemetara for the offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 04.01.2014 the present applicant obtained Rs.31,00,000/- from the complainants in order to secure employment for them in the Govt. Department and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.
(3) Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the offence in question as no seizure has been made from him, as such, the applicant is in jail since 07.06.2015; and the charge sheet has already been filed and, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
(4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that from the complainants namely Govindram, Raghunath, Purshottam, Mahesh & Gayatri, 10,00,000/-, 6,00,000/-, ₹ ₹ 7,00,000/-, Rs.5,00,000/- & 3,00,000/-, respectively have been ₹ obtained by the applicant for providing them job in the Government Department and thereby cheated them by getting huge amount and, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
(5) Taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case; looking to the nature and gravity of the offence and the manner in which the applicant is alleged to have taken huge money of 31,00,000/- from six complainants for providing them ₹ job to the Government Department, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Thus, the bail application is rejected. Certified copy, as per rules.
Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-