Sanju Devi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Page No.1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1165 of 2018 • Sanju Devi W/o Raja Ram Mukhiya aged About 35 Years R/o Rua Bandha, HCl Colony Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Durg Kotwali, Police Chouki Padnampur, District - Durg (C.G.), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent __________________________________________________________ For Applicant :

Mr. Vikash Pradhan, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Mr. Ashish Shukla, Govt. Advocate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order On Board 30/10/2018

1. The applicant has preferred this bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. apprehending her arrest in connection with Crime No.502/2016 registered at Police Station-Kotwali, District - Durg(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 408, 409, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Her name is not reflected in the FIR lodged. Only on the basis of the statement given by witnesses that she has collected Aadhar Card and identification papers from the concerned beneficiaries and the loan was granted by the finance

Page No.2 company does not constitute any offence against her. Hence, it is prayed that applicant be benefited with grant of anticipatory bail.

3. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and the submissions made in this respect.

4. Heard both the parties and perused the case diary.

5. Complainant Hari Om Chourasiya, Cluster Manager of Spandana Sfurti Finance Ltd. has lodged FIR alleging, that some fictitious loan applications were sanctioned by the Finance Company to fake persons which has caused loss to the company. During investigation, some witnesses have made statement, that this applicant was also engaged in the commission of this offence, who collected the identification papers and it is alleged that she make use of the same for obtaining loan in the name of beneficiaries, which were never received by the beneficiaries. Hence, this case.

6. After due consideration, I am of this opinion that applicant should be granted anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, she shall be released on bail by the officer arresting her on her executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :

(i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any

Page No.3 inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge NIsha