Raju Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1153 of 2017 Raju Verma S/o Shri Ganeshram Verma, aged about 32 years, R/o village Bhikhampur, Post Dharamgarh, Tahsil Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham (C.G.).

---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Gole Bajar, District Raipur (C.G.).

---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Y.C.Sharma, Advocate For Respondent :

Shashank Thakur, Government Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 12/03/2018

1. The present is an application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking for anticipatory bail to the applicant apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 80/2017 registered at Police Station Gole Bazar, Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 of I.P.C.

2. The allegation against the present applicant is that, the present applicant had applied for the post of Panchayat Teacher, Librarian through online and submitted his credentials in respect of the qualifications by providing hard copies to the department which on verification was found to be forged/fake.

3. The counsel for the applicant submits that, the applicant infact has not submitted the documents before the concerned authorities. It is some other person who has submitted the same before the department and that the applicant has not even got the employment. Neither was he called for interview, nor has he been able to gain any benefit of the said post and therefore prays for granting the benefit of Anticipatory Bail to the applicant.

4. The State counsel however opposing the bail application submits that, the very fact that the applicant has applied for the post for which he was not otherwise duly qualified shows that the applicant had

-2adopted illegal means for getting the employment and thus prayed for rejection of the bail application.

5. At this juncture, the counsel for the applicant produced certain bail applications i.e. MCRCA No. 1064/2016 and a bunch of bail applications decided together which have been allowed by the coordinate Bench of this Court with similar allegations.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case so also taking note of the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a similar nature of offence where the Anticipatory Bail applications have been allowed, this Court also is inclined to allow the present bail application.

7. In the result, the application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the present Applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting/investigating officer or the Court concerned, as the case may be, with the following terms and conditions: (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the concerned Investigating Officer as and when required;

(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any 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 him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Sumit