High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/5080/2019dismissed

Manish Solanke v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-09-06Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5080 of 2019 • Manish Solanke S/o Narayan Rao Solanke Aged About 39 Years R/o Vaishali Nagar, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Supela, Bhilai District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Rahul Jha, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 06/09/2019

1. Heard.

2. This is the Third Bail Application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 17.04.2017 in connection with Crime No.106/2017 registered at Police Station Supela Bhilai, District Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409, 120B, 34 IPC.

3. The First Bail Application bearing M.Cr.C. No.5536 of 2017 was dismissed as withdrawn on 12.10.2017 and the Second Bail Application bearing M.Cr.C. No.865 of 2019 was also dismissed as withdrawn on 25.02.2019.

4. As per the prosecution case, a report was made by Goukaran Tandan that Sukhchand on behalf of Sahyog Bachat Avm Sakh Saharkari Samiti on the

allurement to give high return of amount collected different amount and the applicant Manish Solanke was one of the directors of the Samiti. Thereafter, neither the money was returned nor any plot was given to them. Consequently, the offence has been committed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 17.04.2017, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

6. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that from 71 persons the money was taken which was more than 1crore rupees and only with two complainants Prakash and Goukaran the compromise has been effected to dilute the case, whereas the victims are more in number.

7. Considering the way the offence has been committed and it seems that the applicant appears to be cleverly entered into the compromise only with the persons who lodged the FIR. Therefore, taking into the facts and background of the case and also the way the offence is committed, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

8. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu