Mohan Kumar Munna v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8776 of 2018 Mohan Kumar Munna S/o Shri Shatruhan Munna Aged About 51 Years R/o Lalpur, Shiv Chowk, in-front of Gajanand Kirana Store, Police Station- Tikarapara, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.--- Petitioner

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police StationMohan Nagar, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent For the applicant :

Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate.

For the Respondent :

Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. Govt. Adv.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board .02.2019

1. This is third bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No.164/2016 registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G) for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 120-B, 34 of IPC & section 10 of the prize Chits & Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978.

2. The first bail application was dismissed on 28.11.2016.

3. As per the prosecution case, the applicant who is one of the directors of the Company namely Susk India Company Limited and Shining Star Infrastate Ltd., had collected the amounts from different persons through the Company at Raipur, Durg and other places. It is alleged that applicant Mohan Kumar Munna was appointed as director of Shining Star Infrastate Ltd., which too was involved in collection of amounts for money circulation with an assurance to return

the same with high rate of interest. However, the amounts were not returned, thereby the offence is committed. It is further alleged that the said collection and circulation of money was made without permission of the Reserve Bank of India or SEBI.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that one of accused Puranik Dewangan has been enlarged on bail in M.Cr.C.No.7710 of 2018 on 21.01.2019 and the case of present applicant is similar to that of Puranik Dewangan. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 25.05.2016 and the charge sheet has been filed, therefore, the present applicant may be enlarged on bail.

5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application.

6. Considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 25.05.2016 and the trial may take certain time as also considering the fact that similarly placed accused has been enlarged on bail by this Court, I am inclined to allow this bail application.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. C.c.

as per rules.

Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o