Naveen Kumar Meshram v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5039 of 2018 • Naveen Kumar Meshram S/o Shyam Rao Meshram, Aged About 40 Years, R/o 17/4, Nehru Nagar Bhilai, P.S. Supela, District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ----Non-applicant For Applicant - Shri B.P. Singh, Advocate.

For Non-applicant/State - Shri Anupam Dubey, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 07-08-2018 1.

Heard on the application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 26-04-2018 in connection with Crime No.272/2017 registered at P.S. - Newai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh for the offence under Section 420, 406, 120B, 34 of the IPC. 2.

It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He is in jail since 26-04-2018. No case is made out against this applicant. The applicant was simply working as an agent/employee of Nandlal and Company Pvt. Ltd. which is based in Bhopal, whose proprietor is Navlesh Choudhari. In fact, it is a case of failed transaction between the company and the complainant, as the complainant and the company both had been party to the agreement, the complainant had option of civil remedy against the company, but instead of that, he has filed this FIR. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant may be granted regular bail. 3.

Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application submitting that the applicant has criminal history and against him one offence

-2of similar nature has been registered in District Korea, hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

4.

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

It is alleged that this applicant in the capacity of an agent/employee of the company gave inducement to complainant G. Govind to obtain C&F agency of the company, regarding which Rs.14,71,000/- were deposited by the complainant with the company, but, subsequent to that the company did not honour the terms of the agreement. Hence, the FIR has been lodged. 6.

After considering on the material present in the case diary, I feel inclined to grant regular bail to this applicant.

7.

Consequently, this application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail is hereby allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, for his appearance as and when directed. 8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Aadil