Allowed

Sushil Kant Hindore v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC6 Nov 2015MCRC/5908/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In MCRC No. 5908 of 2015, the High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to the appellant, who was in jail, for an offence of cheating under Section 420 IPC. The court allowed the bail application noting the completion of the investigation and filed charge sheet requiring trial by JMFC.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail on executing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in sum of Rs.25,000/- to satisfaction of trial court.

Sushil Kant Hindore Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2015)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 5908 of 2015

¶4

Sushil Kant Hindore, son of Sukhnandan Hindore, Aged about 27 years, R/o Village Belsari, P.S. & Tahsil Takhatpur, Civil & Rev. Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Champa, Distt. Janjgir Champa Chattisgarh. --- Respondent

¶7

For the applicant	: Mr. Aman Kesarwani, Advocate
For the Respondent	: Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Advocate

¶8

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶9

Order on Board

¶10

06.11.2015

¶11

This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 213/2015 registered at P.S. Champa, Distt. Janjgir Champa (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 420 IPC.

¶12

As per the prosecution case, the applicant in order to provide jobs to Satyaprakash and Karan Singh Jangde, both are sons of complainant Sukh Dev, has obtained Rs.2.20 lakhs from complainant and thereby committed fraud.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not obtained the amount to provide job but actually the amount was obtained by way of loan and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the charge sheet has been filed and offence is triable by the JMFC.

¶14

Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application.

¶15

Having regard to the fact that the charge sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 25.7.2015, the offence is triable by the JMFC and taking into account the document of agreement filed alongwith the charge sheet which shows that the amount was purported to be

¶16

received as a loan, without making any observation on the merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the 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 . He is directed to appear before the said Court

¶18

on each and every date given by the said Court.

¶19

C.c. today.

¶20

Sd/GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE

¶21

Rao

Sushil Kant Hindore v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Kant Hindore v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivnath Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Pradeep Chouhan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Naihar Sai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Vinod Agrawal Alias Maggu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Lalchand Agrawal Vs Pramod Kumar and Ors.

Smt. Lata Soni Vs State Of Chhattisgarh