Kailash Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No.913 of 2015 • Kailash Singh S/o Ram Singh Aged About 48 Years R/o Wireless Colony, P. S. Tarbahar, Bilaspur, Tah. & Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through: P. S. Torva, Distt. & Revenue Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner Shri R.K. Gupta, Advocate For Respondent/State Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 21/09/2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

1.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.69/15 registered at police station - Torva, Bilaspur, CG for alleged commission of offence under Section 384/34 of IPC and Section 3 & 4 of the Karja Act. 2.

Prosecution case is that the applicant advanced loan to the complainant. Though complainant has re-paid the entire amount of loan, the applicant is extorting huge amount from the complainant with huge interest on the basis of signature obtained on blank paper in his possession. 3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is being falsely implicated by the complainant with dishonest intention to avoid re-payment

of loan advanced to him by the applicant. It is argued that the complainant has admitted that he had taken loan from the applicant. It is submitted that the complainant has not come with any clinching documentary proof of having repaid the amount along with agreed rate of interest nor has given any specific detail of number of cheques or any other material to prima facie establish that the applicant is involved in extortion. 4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the complainant has stated that he was advanced loan of Rs.2,00,000/- by the applicant and he has paid the entire amount of loan. However, at the time of advancing loan, the applicant retained with him signature of the complainant on blank paper and by threatening, using this document against the complainant, applicant is extorting huge money in the name of interest from the complainant. 5.

Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the parties, particularly taking into consideration that admittedly the complainant had taken loan and that there is no clinching documentary evidence of repayment of entire amount of loan with agreed rate of interest or payment of entire amount as stated by the complainant, I am inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6.

Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- along with one local surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer and the applicant shall abide by all the following terms and conditions - (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police 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 from disclosing such facts to the Court or to 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. Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Gowri