Dayanand Lodhi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8550 of 2020 • Dayanand Lodhi, S/o Shri Karan Singh Lodhi, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village Khariya, P.S. Tajnagar Halmukam Pahadpur, P.S. Jaitpur District- Agra, Uttar Pradesh. ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Gariaband, District- Gariaband Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent with MCRC No. 1255 of 2021 • Raghvendra Singh Narwaria, S/o Gauricharan Narwaria, Aged About 47 Years, R/o Gram-A-18, Balwant Nagar, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Indagaon, District- Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Applicants : Shri Pragalbha Sharma, Adv.

in MCRC No. 8550/2020 Shri Abhishek Sharma, Adv.

in MCRC No. 1255/2021 For Respondent/State : Shri Samir Uraon, G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 23.03.2021

1. As both MCRCs arise out of same crime number, they are

being heard and disposed of by this common order.

2. The accused/applicants have moved this first bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 07/2017 registered at Police StationIndagaon, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3, 5 of the Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

3. The prosecution story, in brief is that, the complainant made a written complaint alleging that present applicants had taken money from people on assuring them that they get higher returns on maturity but the amount has not been returned and the office has been closed. Thereafter, offence has been registered against the present applicants.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that applicants are in jail since 02.02.2018 and the charge-sheet has been filed, there is no likelihood of their case being decided in near future, therefore, the present applicants may be released on bail.

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

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

7. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the facts that applicants are in jail since 02.02.2018 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.

8. Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each, with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Ruchi