Raja Murad Shek v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7252 of 2021

1. Raja Murad Shek S/o Mohd. Shoyeb, Aged About 30 Years, Resident Of Saarath, District Devghar Jharkhand.

2. Zafar Husain S/o Khalil Ansari Aged About 45 Years Resident of Baandih, Police Station Palojori, District Devghar Jharkhand.

3. Shahbaaj Ali S/o Rahim Ansari, Aged About 24 Years, Resident Of Kumgada, Police Station Palojori, District Devghar Jharkhand.

4. Sadika Ali S/o Kari Husain Rizvi Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Murgimod, Dhawadagaal, Post Dubrajpur, Police Station Masliya, District Dumka Jharkhand.

---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Sirgitti, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Applicants :

Mr. Umakant Singh Chandel, Adv.

For Respondent :

Mr. Sameer Sharma, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 27.10.2021

1. The accused/applicants have moved this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 181/2021 registered at Police Station - Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420/34 of the IPC.

2. As per the prosecution case, complainant Pardesi Ram Jagat lodged a written report before the police station Sirgitti stating that online fraud has been done from his SBI savings bank account No. 34981842165. Based on the said report, during investigation, applicants have been arrested and the aforesaid offence have been registered against them.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the alleged mobile numbers, through with the fraud was done, are not registered in the name of applicants. The applicants are in jail since 23.08.2021 and they are ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the directions and conditions imposed upon them by the Court, therefore, the present applicants may be granted bail.

4. On the other hand, counsel for the State strongly opposes the bail application.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of the applicants, as the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

7. Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- each, with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the said Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge V/-