High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/7615/2019allowed

Atul Vishwal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-01-16Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7615 of 2019 • Atul Vishwal S/o Late Gopal Vishwal Aged About 32 Years R/o Stadium Road, Kota, Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

----Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate And Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Applicant.

Mr. Hari Agrawal, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Mr. Vinod Kumar Tekam, PL For Objector :

Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 16.01.2020

1. The applicant has filed this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No. 1464/2018 registered at Police Station : Thana- City Kotwali, District Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 408, 467, 468, 471 of IPC.

2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 03.11.2018 an FIR has been lodged by the complainant to the concern Police Station alleging that the applicant is working in the institution namely Tirpuati Consultancy Services owned by the complainant, which is involved in business to collecting/submitting employee Provident Fund and Employee State Insurance from various Industrial institutions, educational institutions

and Banks. While, on service, the accused has embezzled a total sum of Rs. 52,00,000/- (Fifty-two lacs) from the complainant's firm. On the basis of that offence has been registered against the applicant and he has been arrested.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the entire allegations against the applicant is false and well-planned because the complainant/owner of the business was engaged in a love affairs with the sister of the applicant and the applicant was against this affair. As applicant is in jail since 08.11.2019 and he is ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the conditions and directions, which may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court, therefore, he may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, State counsel as well as counsel for the objector opposes the bail application.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the crime, the detention period of the applicant, as trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release him 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. 50,000/- with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Vijay Sahu