Kumar Abhishek v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5519 of 2018 Kumar Abhishek S/o Bajrangi Lal Shrivastava Aged About 37 Years R/o Flat No. 601, R N Enclave, Kranti Factory Road Gandhinagar, Kankad Bag, Patna District Patna (Bihar) ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Civil Lines, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For applicant - Shri N. Naha Roy, Advocate.

For Respondent/State -Shri Suryakant Mishra, PL. Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 1/08/2018 1.

This is third bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of temporary bail. The first bail application was dismissed on 4/10/2017 vide M.Cr.C. No.5684 of 2017. The second bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution on 26/07/2018 vide M.Cr.C. No.5270 of 2018. 2.

The applicant has preferred this application for grant of bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.608/2013 registered in Police Station Civil Lines, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) for offence punishable under sections 420, 468, 471, 34 of IPC.

3.

As per the prosecution case, the applicant alongwith the other coaccused published an advertisement in the news-paper for appointment in Central Ocean Regulatory Authority, Ernakulam. Thereafter, different people filled up the form and received phone call and they were allured that on payment of certain amount, they would be provided job. Consequently, few of the victims deposited the amount in an earmarked account given by the accused. Thereafter, the appointment letter was also issued and after issuance of appointment letter, when the victims went to

join their service, it was found that the entire selection process was fake and there is no such company. Consequently, different amount were received from the persons and fraud was committed. 4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant may be released on temporary bail on the ground that children of the applicant are to be admitted to the next session and if the applicant is not released then entire carrier of the children shall suffer.

5.

Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 6.

The first bail application have already been dismissed on merits on 4/10/2017 and second bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution on 26/07/2018, considering the nature of allegation, I do not find it proper to entertain this third bail application for grant of temporary bail.

7.

Accordingly, the third bail application is dismissed. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE gouri