Allowed

Mohammad Jabir v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC10 Mar 2021MCRC/525/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the first bail application filed by an applicant in custody for cheating under Section 420 IPC. The High Court directed the release on execution of a personal bond with two sureties subject to standard conditions including refraining from tampering with evidence and appearing before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by executing a personal bond for Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each subject to stated conditions.

Mohammad Jabir Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

¶1

Page 1 of 3

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 525 of 2021

¶5

Mohammad Jabir S/o Rashid, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Lohisar, Tahsil Kama, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶6

---- Applicant Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Acting Through Officer-In-Charge, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.).

¶8

	---- Non-Applicant
For Applicant	: Shri K.A. Ansari (Sr. Advocate) with Shri Devesh G. Kela, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State	: Shri C. B. Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer.

¶9

Hon'ble Justice Shri Gautam Chourdiya Order on Board

¶10

10/03/2021

¶11

1. This is the First Bail Application filed under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the applicant for grant of bail as he is in custody since 27/11/2020 in connection with Crime No. 626/2020 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence under Section 420 of IPC .

¶12

1. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant having seen the advertisement for sale of Activa vehicle on OLX on 23/06/2020 contacted one person namely Sanjay on Mobile and agreed to purchase the vehicle for Rs. 25,000/-. The said person who is resident of Raipur demanded Rs. 3,150/- from the complainant for transporting the vehicle to Bilaspur where the complainant resides. On this the complainant transferred the said amount through PAYTM in the account of Sudhir Beria. However, despite transfer of the amount, the complainant did not get the vehicle. On report being lodged the crime was registered and

¶13

Page 2 of 3

¶14

during investigation the applicant was arrested in connection with the aforesaid offence.

¶15

1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 27/11/2020, charge sheet has already been filed and trial is likely to take some time for its disposal. He also submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent. Therefore, the present applicant be released on bail.

¶16

1. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the bail application. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedent.

¶17

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

1. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the detention period of the applicant who is 30 years old, the charge sheet has already been filed, offence is triable by Magistrate and the fact that the applicant is the first offender having no criminal antecedent and there is no apprehension of the applicant tampering with the evidence or absconding as admitted by both the counsel and there is no apprehension of the applicant tampering with the evidence or absconding as admitted by both the counsel, and the trial is likely to take some time for disposal, without commenting anything on merits of the case, the application is allowed . It is directed that in the event of applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶19

i. he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court,

¶20

Page 3 of 3

¶21

ii. he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and

¶22

iii. he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶23

iv. he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future or else this order granting bail to the applicant shall automatically stand cancelled without further reference to the Court.

¶24

-Sd/-

¶25

(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge

¶26

Chandrakant

Mohammad Jabir v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Jabir 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

Tomendra Kumar Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Shubham Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Harichand @ Hari Lakda Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deepak Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Narayan Prasad Rajwade Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh