High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/4823/2017dismissed

Sandeep Agrawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-11-02Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 4823 of 2017 Sandeep Agrawal S/o Shri Murarilal Dhanania Aged About 43 Years Occupation Company Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Raipur, CG District- Raipur CG R/o House No. 1/15, Harsh Vihaar Colony Daldal Seoni, Mowa Raipur, District Raipur CG. ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Anti Corruption Bureau Raipur, District- Raipur.

---- Respondent For applicant Mr. Kasif Shakeel, Adv.

For Respondent/State Mr. Anil Pandey, Dy. Govt. Adv Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board 2-111. This is first bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the applicant before this Court and no bail application is pending before any other court.

2. Dy. Govt. Adv. for the State produced the case diary of Crime No. 14/2015, registered in police station Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (CG) for offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

3. In brief, prosecution story is that on 3-3-2015 a case under Section 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 has been registered in PS Anti Corruption Bureau, EOW, Raipur against applicant Sandeep Agrawal who was the Company Secretary in the CG State Civil Supplies Corporation, Raipur. During the investigation on the basis of collected evidence, the income and expenditure was calculated. Ultimately it has been found after considering the income and expenditure in relevant period, that disproportionate property amounting to Rs. 96,91,530/- was in possession of the applicant and his wife. Said property was 142.28% in excess.

4. The applicant is in custody since 29-7-2016.

5. Arguments heard.

6. Counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated hence he may be released on bail.

7. On the other hand, the State counsel opposed the bail application.

8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the seriousness of the alleged offence and also the impact of granting bail on the society, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

9. Consequently, the MCRC is dismissed.

Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) Judge Pathak