Suresh Das v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Misc. Criminal Case No.996 of 2017 Suresh Das, aged 54 years, S/o late Balak Das Panika, R/o Village Kalikapara, Ward No.8, Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) at present Bungalow Yard, Quarter No.7/1, Railway Colony, Bilaspur, P.S. Torwa, Tahsil & District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Police Station Koni, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant:

Mr. Ritesh Verma, Advocate.

For Non-applicant:

Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Deputy Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 07/04/2017

1. The accused/applicant has moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.90/2014, registered at Police Station Koni, Distt. Bilaspur, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 472 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

2. This is the sixth bail application filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of regular bail.

3. The allegation against the applicant is that he along with co-accused - his wife Anju Bairagi and Narad Tiwari obtained 30 lakhs from 12 ₹ persons for providing them Government jobs and thereby committed the aforesaid offences.

4. The fourth bail application filed on behalf of the applicant was rejected by this Court on 9-3-2016, thereafter, he preferred S.L.A.

(Crl.) No.3473/2016 before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court dismissed the same, however, granted liberty to the applicant to approach the High Court for seeking bail on the ground that the direction passed by the High Court to the trial court to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously, has not been complied with. In view of that, the present sixth bail application has been entertained.

5. It has been brought to the notice of the Court that all charge-sheeted witnesses have already been examined, but thereafter, co-accused Anju Bairagi has been arrested and against her, charge-sheet has now been framed and trial is going-on.

6. Learned State counsel opposes the application.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

8. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence, facts and circumstances of the case, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 14-6-2014, evidence has already been concluded and completed against the applicant and also considering the period of detention of the applicant, I consider it a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the sixth bail application is allowed.

9. It is, therefore, directed that the applicant 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 Court for his appearance as and when directed.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma