Manoranjan Kumar Pandey & ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8217 of 2019

1. Manoranjan Kumar Pandey, S/o Late Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Delha (Kalyanpur), Police Station- Delha, DistrictGaya, (Bihar).

2. Jay Bhagwan Tripathi, S/o Brajeshwar Tripathi, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Village Bana, Police Station- Khijrasrai, District- Gaya, (Bihar).

3. Rajeev Ranjan, S/o Kaushal Kishore Bhumihar, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Kathautiya, Police Station- Aati, District- Gaya,(Bihar).

4. Ranjeet Kumar, S/o Awadhesh Kumar, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Pulma, Police Station- Akbarpur, District- Nawada, (Bihar) ---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through: Station House Officer, Police StationKatghora, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. S. R. J. Jaiswal, Adv.

For Respondent/State : Mr. Vinod Kumar Tekam, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 23.01.2020

1. The accused/applicants have moved this first bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 226/2019 registered at Police Station- Katghora, District- Korba, (C.G.). for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 of I.P.C.

2. The prosecution story, in brief is that, it is alleged that the applicants have withdrawn the amount of Rs. 1,60,000/- by using fake ATM card from the bank account of father of complainant Bhupendra Kanwar. Thereafter, offence has been registered against the present applicants.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question.

He further submits that complainant Bhupendra Singh Kanwar and applicants have arrived at into compromise and complainant has also executed a document in (Annexure A/2). The applicants are in jail since 24.11.2019, there is no likelihood of their case being decided in near future, therefore, the present applicants may be released on bail.

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

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

6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the facts that complainant also executed a compromise deed, the applicants are in jail since 24.11.2019 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

7. Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each, with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Ruchi