Allowed

Narendra Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Sept 2022MCRC/6913/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hilgh Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur allowed an application for regular bail under Section 439 CrPC. The court noted that the applicant was not named as a director in the company documents or FIR, differing from the basis of his first bail rejection.

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail allowed; applicant directed to be released on bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety.

Narendra Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Corruption | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.CR.C. No. 6913 of 2022

¶5

Narendra Singh, S/o. Jaswant Singh, aged about 57 years, R/o. Village Rahanwali Q. No. 16, Damkora Road, Tahsil Dohana, Police Station - Tohana District Fatehabad. Present Address 63/17, Damkora Road Tohana, Police Station Tohana City District Fatehpur, Haryana.

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House Officer, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant	: Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Sr. Advocate with
	Mr. Atul Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate
For Respondent/State	: Mr. R.M. Solapurkar, G.A. with
	Ms. Abhiyunnati Singh, Panel Lawyer

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board

¶12

08/09/2022

¶13

Applicant has filed this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.110/2017, registered at Police Station – Ratanpur, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 420/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 4, 5, 6 & 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.

¶14

¶15

This is second bail application of applicant. His first bail application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 29.03.2022 in M.Cr.C. No. 730 of 2022.

¶16

Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.04.2017 written complaint was lodged by one Budhwari Bai making allegation that she deposited amount in regular installments with GN Gold and GN Dairy Limited Company on assurance that company will double the amount deposited by her in short span of time, but after period of maturity, amount was not returned to her. During course of investigation, Police initially arrested one Devesh Kumar Bajaj and seized documents of Company. Applicant was also arrested on 23.11.2021 in aforementioned crime.

¶17

Shri V.R. Tiwari, learned senior counsel for applicant would submit that first bail application of applicant was rejected considering the submission made by learned State counsel that applicant is one of Director of G.N. Gold Company. He contended that police has now filed charge-sheet, before concerned Court along with documents showing incorporation of G.N. Gold Company and Article of Association, wherein name of applicant is not mentioned as one of the director of company. He also contended that inadvertently there is pleading in this application, which was made on the basis of information supplied by relatives of the applicant that applicant was a director for sometime in the year 2009, but he left the company after three months. He contended that as per case of prosecution, coaccused Satnam Singh Randhava along with other persons have

¶18

¶19

registered more than one company. In FIR also, the allegations have been levelled against other co-accused persons, but applicant is not named therein. As prosecution has not collected any documents to show that applicant is also one of the director of company. No offence as alleged against applicant would be made out. Hence, prayed that applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶20

Shri R.M. Solapurkar, learned counsel for State opposing the submissions made by learned counsel for applicant would submit that in the memorandum statement of applicant, he admitted that he was inducted as director of company on 02.04.2009. However, upon asking, he submits that though the article of association of G.N. Gold Company is available in the chargesheet, but it does not mention the name of applicant as one of the director of company, but other persons namely Satnam Singh, Sarabjeet Singh and Tarsen Singh are shown as director of the company. In the list of subscribers name of Satnam Singh, Tarsen Singh, Gurpreet Singh, Balwant Singh, Malkit Singh and Kamaljeet Singh are mentioned.

¶21

Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of applicant submits that even if memorandum statement is to be considered at this stage, applicant has stated that he was working in G.N. Dairy Limited Company as an employee and Satnam Singh was one of director of company, who asked him for some documents of applicant and he was not aware of the fact that he has been inducted as one of director.

¶22

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

¶24

Perusal of rejection order of first bail application (Annexure A-1) shows that this Court considering the statement of learned counsel for respective parties that applicant is also one of the director, dismissed application for grant of bail. Today, learned counsel for State after going through the material available in the case diary, made submission that name of applicant is not mentioned in any of documents as director of G.N. Gold Company. Counsel for State also submits that name of applicant is not mentioned in the FIR but name of other persons have been specifically mentioned.

¶25

Having regard to the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, considering that applicant was arrested on 23.11.2021 and submission of learned counsel for State based on case diary that applicant is not named as a director of company, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the bail application.

¶26

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail upon his furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that:-

¶27

a). Applicant shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

¶28

(b). Applicant shall not, in any manner, tamper with

¶29

¶30

the prosecution witnesses.

¶31

c). If the applicant is found involved in similar offence in the future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of Bail.

¶32

Certified copy as per rules.

¶33

Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶34

Balram

Narendra Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra Singh 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

Deepali Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lalima Jaiswal Vs Jyoti Mishra

Uttam Kumar Pandey (in Person) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dhansai and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ashutosh Miri Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sunil Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh