Allowed

Praveer Kumar Chakrawarty v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC10 Mar 2022MCRCA/178/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a second anticipatory bail application by Praveer Kumar Chakrawarty, proprietor of Agrotech Solutions, apprehending arrest in a banking fraud case. The court granted bail despite prosecution allegations of co-conspiring, relying on the fact that co-accused already secured bail and lack of direct documents against the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant shall be released on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety, subject to standard conditions of bail.

Praveer Kumar Chakrawarty Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheque Dishonour | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 178 of 2022

¶4

Praveer Kumar Chakrawarty S/o Viswanath Chakrawarty, Aged About 63 Years, R/o Flat No. 601, Block A Lotar Arched Junwani, Motilal Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Berla, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

--- Respondent

¶9

For Applicant : Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Gurudev I Sharan, GA.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board

¶11

10/03/2022

¶12

Heard.

¶13

This is Second Anticipatory Bail application of applicant. First anticipatory bail application was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 20.01.2022 in MCRC (A) No. 1223 of 2021.

¶14

Applicant has filed this application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.210/2019 registered at Police Station -Berla, District- Bemetara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 409, 34 of IPC.

¶15

Case of prosecution, in brief, is that Raj Kishore Behra (co-accused) applied for grant of loan of Rs.73,89,000/- for construction of 'poly-house' with Dena Bank, Berla. Loan amount, as demanded by Rajkishore Behra, was sanctioned and Rs.30 lakhs was disbursed as first installment. Loan amount was deposited in account of Vandana Chakravarty (co-accused). From account of Vandana Chakrawarty, amount of Rs.5 lakhs on 03.04.2017 & Rs.4 lakhs on 08.08.2017 was transferred to account of Rajkishore Behra. When Bank officials went for spot inspection, they found that no construction work was started by Rajkishore Behra. During enquiry, they found that they have obtained loan amount by making false submission that they are going to construct 'polyhouse' from loan amount. Matter was reported to higher official of Bank and after enquiry,

¶16

¶17

complaint was lodged against four persons by name Siddharth Chintaman Mandwakar, (one of branch manager of Bank), Rajkihore Behra, Vandan Chakrbarty and her husband ie present applicant.

¶18

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has not committed any offence as alleged against him, he has been implicated in the crime only because he is husband of co-accused Vandana Chakravarty in whose bank loan account amount was deposited. Further, applicant is also one of proprietor of M/s. Agrotech Solutions alongwith co-accused Vandana Chakravarty. In case diary, there is no material to show participation of present applicant in aforementioned crime. All other co-accused persons have already been granted benefit of anticipatory bail by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 22.06.2020, 17.10.2019 & 17.03.2020 in MCRC(A) Nos.413/2020, 1309/2019 & 2065/2019. Hence, this applicant may also be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶19

Learned State Counsel opposes submission of learned counsel for applicant and submits that Rajkishore Behra along-with other co-accused have played fraud and got sanctioned loan amount of Rs. 73,89,000/-, out of which, Rs.30 lakhs was disbursed in bank account of co-accused Vandana Chakravarty. Present applicant is husband of Vandana Chakravarty and also proprietor along-with her of M/s. Agrotech Solution, which prima facie shows involvement and participation of this applicant also in aforementioned crime. Upon asking to learned State Counsel as to whether there is any direct involvement of present applicant in the crime, he submits that in case diary there is no document which is said to be executed by this applicant or has approached the Bank along-with co-accused Rajkishore Bahra available.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶21

Considering entire facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, submissions of counsel for parties, and the fact that as per allegations available in case diary as stated by State Counsel that application for grant of loan is

¶22

¶23

made by co-accused Rajkishore Behra and amount which was disbursed of Rs.30 lakhs was deposited in account of co-accused Vandana Chakravarty, other co-accused persons have been enlarged on anticipatory bail, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to grant this second application for anticipatory bail to applicant.

¶24

Accordingly, this second anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in event of arrest of applicant in connection with the crime in question, he shall be released on bail by Officer Arresting her/him on executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of concerned Arresting Officer. Applicant shall also abide by following conditions :

¶25

(i) that applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

¶26

(ii) that applicant 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/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶27

(iii) that applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

¶28

(iv) that applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶29

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶30

Jamal/-

Praveer Kumar Chakrawarty v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praveer Kumar Chakrawarty 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

Lailun Kumar Bhardwaj Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Indlal Sahu and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

C.I.D.C. through M.D. and Anr. Vs Chakresh Jain and Ors.

Dr. Shahid Ali Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Prabodh Kumar Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Siyaram Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh