Allowed

Bhupendra Vishwakarma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Nov 2022MCRC/7397/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted bail to the applicant arrested under Section 420 IPC for cheque bounce and cheating, directing release on a personal bond with two sureties in view of pre-trial detention.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant directed to be released on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs. 50,000/- with 2 sureties for the like amount.

Bhupendra Vishwakarma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 7397 of 2022

¶5

Bhupendra Vishwakarma S/o Banshi Lal Vishwakarma Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Runiyadih, Police Station Vishrampur, Tahsil And District- Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ramanujnagar, District- Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

----Non-Applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Shri Vasant Zokarkar, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Miss Priyamvada Singh, Deputy GA.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

14/11/2022 :

¶14

The applicant has preferred this application for grant of bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.223/2021 registered in Police Station Ramanujnagar, District Surajpur for offence under Section 420 of the IPC.

¶15

This is the 2^nd bail application on behalf of the applicant. The earlier bail application has been rejected on merits vide order dated 22.2.2022 passed in MCRC No.104/2022.

¶16

Allegation against the present applicant is that on the pretext of providing Government job, the applicant had taken some amount from the complainant and other persons for which he had given an affidavit

¶17

¶18

as also some cheques to the complainant and other persons, which were bounced and thereby cheated them.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is in jail since 4.12.2021 and offence is triable by the JMFC, and material witnesses namely, Chhatrapal Sahu, Rakesh and Shambhu Singh have been examined, and conclusion of trial is likely to take some more time. He further submits that there are major discrepancies in the case of the prosecution as the witnesses have narrated entirely different story. Lastly, he submits that the FIR has been lodged belatedly i.e. after about 2 years.

¶20

On the other hand, learned State Counsel would oppose the bail application on submission that there are two previous criminal antecedents registered against the applicant and the material witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution.

¶21

Having considered the submissions, particularly, the length of pre-trial detention, the offence is triable by the JMFC and without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶22

Accordingly, the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with 2 sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said Court.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari)

¶25

Judge

¶26

Barve

Bhupendra Vishwakarma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupendra Vishwakarma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Mashih Vs Rajnald Petar and Anr.

Ramnarayan Patel Vs Ashwani Sahu

Smt. Birjha Bai Yadaw Vs Omprakash Kannauje

Smt. Kshiti Pradhan Vs Sanjay Pradhan

Dilip Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhajan Singh Gandhi Vs Radwan @ Radheshyam