Shrimati Sindhu Singhare v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8886 of 2018 • Shrimati Sindhu Singhare W/o Deepak Singare Aged About 42 Years R/o Om Nagar, Urla, Ward No. 59, P. S. Pulgaon District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Bhatapara City District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent ________________________________________________________ For Applicant : Shri Vishnu Koshta, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Alok Nigam, G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 08/05/2019
1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail as she is arrested in connection with crime No. 29/2016, registered at Police Station Bhatapara, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420, 409, 120 B r/w 34 of the IPC, Section 10 of CG Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005, Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of Enami Chit Fund Act and Money Circulation Scheme Adhiniyam and Section 45 of RBI Act.
2. As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused persons floated a company in the name of Yash Dream Real Estate Limited Company and have collected money from various investors by alluring them and promising them for better return.
Total 2,05,51,310/- Rs. has been invested by 1169 investors on this company. At the time of maturity, company owners have not return money to the investors and on 19.08.2015 they have closed their office and fled away. Thereafter, one of their office employee namely Manoj Kumar Sahu made a complainant before police station. On the basis of said report, offence has been registered. During course of investigation, the applicant has been arrested on 29.09.2015.
3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. Total 3 different cases have been registered against her, out of which in two cases, the applicant has been granted benefit of bail. He further submits that the applicant is lady and she is in custody since 29.09.2015, charge-sheet has been filed, total 109 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution and till date only few witnesses have been examined, therefore, trial is likely to take much more time. In these circumstances, she may be released on bail.
4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application.
5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the case diary with due care.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence collected by the prosecution and further considering the fact that the applicant is a lady and she is in custody since 29.09.2015, charge-sheet has already been filed and trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release her on bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
8. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for her appearance before the said Court as and when directed.
Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Shubham