← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/7352/2021allowed

Shailendra Lahre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2021-10-28Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7352 of 2021

1. Shailendra Lahre S/o Heeraram Lahre Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Khamhariya, Police Station Jarhagaon, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh,

2. Smt. Priyanka Lahre W/o Atul Rathore Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Khamhariya, Police Station Jarhagaon, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh,

3. Abhishek Rathore S/o Shri Mahendra Rathore Aged About 34 Years R/o 22 Sant Marg Gandhi Ward No. 15 In The Order Sheet, Indore, District Indore, Madhya Pradesh, ---- Applciants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali, Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh, ---- Respondent For Appicants : Shri Aman Sexena, Advocate For Respondent /State : Shri Wasim Miyan, PL For Respondent /Objector : Shri Ravindra Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 28/10/2021 The applicants have filed this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as they are in custody in connection with Crime No. 328/2021 registered at police station City Kotwali, District Mungeli (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420,467,468,471 and 120-B/34 IPC. As per prosecution case, report was lodged by the complainant Aditya Singh alleging that the applicant along with the co-accused

persons have cheated him of Rs. 4,00,000/- for providing job in the Forest Department.

Counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that similarly placed coaccused have been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 3102/2021 and M.Cr.C. No. 2468/2021 vide order dated 14.06.2021 and therefore the present applicants may also be granted similar benefit. He further submits that the applicants are in jail since 09.06.2021 and looking to the conduct of the prosecution it is clear that the trial will take time for its conclusion.

On the other hand counsel for the State as well as the objector opposes the bail application.

Having heard counsel for the parties, considered the totality of the fact, in particular the detention period of the applicants, I am inclined to release them on regular bail. Accordingly, their application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicants' furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, they shall be released on bail.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge suguna