← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/5445/2017dismissed

Sudipto Chatterjee @ K. M. Acharya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-11-21Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5445 of 2017 Sudipto Chatterjee @ K. M. Acharya S/o Ramchandra Chatterjee, Aged About 38 Years R/o 41/08, Ramkrishna Line, Shivpur, Hawda, Police Station Chatterjeehat, Hawda (West Bengal) Mob.No. 9051344144 ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Line, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent Shri C.R.Sahu, counsel for the applicant/s.

Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for the State.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 21/11/2017 Heard.

The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.699/2015 registered at Police Station - Civil Line, Raipur, District - Raipur (CG) for alleged commission of offences under 420 of IPC and Section 66 (A), 66 (D) of the Information Technologies Act.

2.

Case of the prosecution is that the applicant and co-accused, with an intention to cheat the complainant, showed them forged website stating that they will get the loan of Rs.1 Crore arranged for him and on this inducement, they got more than Rs.22 Lakhs transferred in the name of co-accused. 3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the involvement of the applicant in the present case is an afterthought. The applicant has no role to play in the present case. The amount which has been transferred is in the account of the co-accused and not the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge sheet has been filed.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes bail application and submits that by cheating the complainant, huge amount of more than Rs.22 lakhs was taken and the complainant, in his statement, has clearly stated that the applicant is also involved.

5.

Considering the nature of allegations, amount involved and the alleged role of the applicant in the present case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 6.

The application is accordingly rejected.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti