The Court dismissed an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. raised by an accused apprehending arrest for cheating. Finding the case not a fit one for bail, the Court rejected the plea despite the applicant's allegations of false claims regarding the nature of the transaction.
Anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 743 of 2021
Ashutosh Rai S/o Shri Rambahadur Aged About 25 Years R/o Kedarpur, Ring Road Ambikapur P.S. Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicant
Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ambikapur ---- Non-applicant
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicant : Shri Bhaskar Payashi, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Anjali Singh Chauhan, Panel Lawyer For Objector : Shri Ankur Agrawal, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (Proceedings through Video Conferencing) Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board
10.08.2021
2
he approached the applicant for refund of his money, he denied the same. It is also mentioned that cash amount of Rs.85,000/was given in presence of Prakash Sonkar at Gandhi Nagar Stadium and given a cheque of Rs.2,58,000. Based on the aforementioned complaint, instant crime is registered against the present applicant.
3
levelled against the present applicant is false and frivolous. It is contended that cheque of Rs.2,58,000/- which is stated to be given to the complainant bearing cheque No.521194 is deposited in the account of applicant on 12.11.2020. In the complaint, allegation of complainant is that he handed over the cheque on 08.11.2020, on the said date applicant was outstation, he was in Odisha where he got infected with COVID-19 and was found positive, which is apparent from Annexure A/4. Further bank transaction on 09.11.2020 of withdrawal of the amount from the ATM shows that it was from the ATM of Odisha. He submits that applicant was not available at Ambikapur where alleged handing over the cheque is stated by the complainant. He further argued that as the complainant and applicant was doing the joint business of sale and purchase of vehicle, there was some money dispute. The Scorpio vehicle was sold to one Umesh Bhagat and he has paid the amount with respect to sale of vehicle through disputed cheque bearing No.521194 and said cheque was deposited in his account. He further pointed out that documents filed by the objector shows that cheque amount of Rs.2,58,000/- has been deposited in the account of the applicant whereas the document shows that Rs.2,48,000/- is deposited through cheque which also shows that allegations are not correct, hence, applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
4
allegation that complainant has handed over Rs.85,000/- to present applicant in cash after discussion that applicant will provide him a Government job in SECL. The amount of Rs.85,000/- has been paid in presence of Prakash Sonkar and his statement is also recorded by the Police under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. She pointed out that the details of transfer of amount has also been specifically mentioned in the First Information Report, hence, submission made by learned counsel for the applicant to state that false and frivolous allegation is made in view of specific allegations in First Information Report may not be sustainable.
5
towards money for getting Government employment. It is contended that as the applicant taken the different stands at different points of time, which itself shows that applicant has not come to the Court with clean hands.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge
Yogesh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. given the nature of the cheating allegations and his shifting defenses.
Whether the prima facie evidence of convergence of statements and the existence of a joint business relationship negate the frivolous nature of the allegations.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ashutosh Rai
State of Chhattisgarh
Parth Prateem Sahu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
