Ghogharu Shankar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 6983 of 2019 • Tirath Satnami S/o Panchuram Satnami Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Saltikari, Police Station And Tahsil Dongargarh, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District - Magistrate, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent MCRC No. 7407 of 2019 • Ghogharu Shankar Sahu S/o Firtu Sahu Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Sambalpur, Police Station Deori, Tahsil Dondi Lohara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicants : Shri Uttam Pandey, Advocate For Respondent /State : Shri Anurag Verma, PL Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 16/12/2019 As both these M.Cr.Cs. arise out of the same crime number, they are being disposed of by this common order.

The applicants have filed this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as they are in custody in connection with Crime No. 592/2019 registered at police station Durg, District Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 420,465,467,468 and 471 IPC.

Case of the prosecution in brief is that a memorandum was sent by the JMFC Durg to the Incharge of the Polcie station City Kotwali, Durg and it was directed that the applicants have stood as surety in Criminal Case No. 2171/2019 and they had tempered the public documents by producing forged Rin Pustika Kisan Kitab and thus had wrongly identified the accused therefore, the applicants were prosecuted.

Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that the applicants are in jail since 28.06.2019; the charge sheet has already been filed; the offence is triable by the Magistrate and looking to the conduct of the prosecution it is clear that the trial will take time for its conclusion.

On the other hand counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

Having heard counsel for the parties, considered the totality of the fact, in particular the detention period of the applicants, I am inclined to release them on regular bail. Accordingly, their applications filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicants' furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety for the

like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, they shall be released on bail.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge suguna