Allowed

Mohan Negi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Dec 2022MCRC/9594/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for the accused, who was charged with cheating for misrepresenting government employment to collect funds. The court relied on the fact that only a few prosecution witnesses had been examined, none had specifically impugned the applicant's role, and co-accused persons had been released. Bail was granted with

What did the court decide?

Grant of regular bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000 with one surety, subject to conditions to appear in court and not tamper with witnesses.

Mohan Negi Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 9594 of 2022

¶5

Mohan Negi S/o Mr Punaram Negi Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Singouditarai, Ward No. 5, P.S. Narayanpur, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Arjuni, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Respondents

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate For State : Mr. Akash Pandey, Panel Lawyer

¶11

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

Order On Board

08/12/2022

Heard.

Applicant has filed this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail as he been arrested in connection with Crime No.215/2021 registered at Police Station- Arjuni, Dhamtari for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120-B, 34 of IPC.

¶16

This is the second bail application of the applicant. His first bail application was dismissed on 13.12.2021.

¶17

Case of prosecution is that applicant and other co-accused person cheated complainant Mahendra Kumar Sahu and others

¶18

-2-

¶19

in the name of providing employment on the post of Peon and Driver in the office of Janpad Panchayat Kurud as well as office of Collector, Dhamtari and collected huge amount of Rs.22 lakhs. Some of the amount has been deposited in the bank account of applicant and some of the amount has been deposited in the bank account of other co-accused person, which was later on withdrawn also. After conclusion of appointment process, complainants could not secure the job and when they approached the applicant for refund of their amount, the amount was not refunded to them and thereafter, the report was lodged.

¶20

Learned counsel for applicant would submit that this repeat bail application is filed on the ground of delay in trial and also on the ground that other two co-accused persons have been enlarged on regular bail by coordinate Bench of this Court. He also submits that out of 30 witnesses, till October 2022, only 3 witnesses were examined by the prosecution and all three witnesses have not specifically stated that the applicant has also cheated the complainant inducing him to provide Govt. job. He contended that offences are triable by Judicial Magistrate First Class, trial may take some time, hence, applicant may be enlarged on regular bail.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits considering

¶22

-3-

¶23

the role of the applicant in commission of crime, hence, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶25

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the applicant that till October 2022, only 3 prosecution witnesses out of 30 witnesses, were examined before the trial Court, none of the examined witnesses has specifically made allegation against applicant, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the bail application.

¶26

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail on 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 the prosecution witnesses.

¶29

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.

¶30

Certified copy as per rules.

¶31

Sd//---/---/-/---/-/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶32

Praveen

Mohan Negi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Negi 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

Paritosh Kumar Singh Alias Diwakar Choudhary Vs Senior Intelligence Officer

Smt. Suryakanta Yadav Vs Sunil Jain

Smt. Premin Dhivar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Itwaru Ram Netam Vs Union of India

Bintu Ram Netam Vs Union of India

Banwarilal Kushwaha Vs State of Chhattisgarh