Pladisiyus Toppo v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5450 of 2016 • Pladisiyus Toppo S/O Rafail Toppo Aged About 39 Years Caste Uranw, Occup. Service Halka Patwari, R/O Village-Pathalgaon, Thana-Pathalgaon, Civil & Revenue District-Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Thana-Pathalgaon, District-Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :
Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent/State :
Mr. Anil S. Pandey, Govt. Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 15-09-2016 1.
This is the first 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 18-12-2015 in connection with Crime No. 296 of 2015, registered at Police Station Pakthalgaon, District Jashpur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 4r20, 467, 468, 471, 120-B/34 of the IPC.
2.
Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that certain land was recorded in the name of Chamru in revenue records. Subsequently, Chamru had executed a sale deed in favour of Manish Agrawal. Though Chamru was not an aboriginal tribe and owner, but his name was recorded in place of Harihar Singh, who was an ab-original tribe, therefore, by mutation of name, fraud was committed in connivance with other co-accused persons. 3.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that chargesheet has been filed in this case, the applicant is in jail since 18-12-2015 and no further investigation is necessary and the offence is triable by the Judicial
Magistrate First Class. He would further submit that the case of the present applicant is similar to that of other co-accused who has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 15-6-2016 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C.No.2848 of 2016, therefore, present applicant may also be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.
4.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail, however, he does not dispute the fact that similarly placed other coaccused person has been enlarged on bail by this Court. 5.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary and other documents which would show that the charge-sheet has been filed and the evidence collected by the prosecution appears to be documentary in nature.
6.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations leveled against the applicant and further considering the fact that similarly placed other co-accused person has been enlarged on bail by this Court and also the fact that charge-sheet in this case has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 18-12-2015, this court is inclined to release the applicant on bail.
7.
Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance as and when directed.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Raju