Allowed

Sangita Rai v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Jan 2023MCRCA/1206/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order addressed three anticipatory bail applications arising from the same crime involving accused of not paying crop purchase amount. The High Court was satisfied that the applicants were a fit case for anticipatory bail, granting them protection and imposing conditions regarding interrogation and appearance.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and one surety, subject to conditions.

Sangita Rai Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Anticipatory Bail | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRCA No. 1195 of 2022

¶5

Sunit Rai W/o Late Jageshwar Rai Aged About 58 Years R/o P.V. 46 Ward No. 1 Pakhanjur, Police Station Pakhanjur, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Police Station in Charge Gondahur, Police Station Gondahur, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

MCRCA No. 1197 of 2022

¶11

Rina Rai W/o Shri Sunit Rai Aged About 49 Years R/o P.V. 46, Ward No. 1 Pakhanjur, P.S.- Pakhanjur, District- North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Police Station In-Charge Gondahur, P.S.Gondahur, District- North Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

---- Respondent

¶15

MCRCA No. 1206 of 2022

¶16

Sangita Rai D/o Shri Sunit Rai Aged About 31 Years R/o P.V. 46 Ward No. 1, Pakhanjur P.S. Pakhanjur, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) At Present R/o Kanker P.S. Kanker District - North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

¶17

	---- Petitioner
Versus

¶18

 State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Gondahur, District North Bastar K	Police Station In-Charge Gondahur, P.S. anker, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent
For Applicants :	Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate.
For Respondent/State :	Mr. Avinash K. Mishra, G.A.

¶19

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board

¶20

17/01/2023

¶21

As all these MCRCAs arise out of same crime number, they are being heard

¶22

and disposed of by this common order.

¶23

These applications under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

¶24

have been filed by the applicants who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 06/2022 registered at Police Station- Gondahur,

¶25

¶26

District- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for commission of the offence punishable under Sections 120(B), 420, 34 of the IPC.

¶27

As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicants have purchased the corn (Maize) from the farmers and have not paid the remaining amount of Rs. 2,04,513/- to the farmers. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicants.

¶28

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that there is no ingredient of the alleged offence available on record. Applicants have been falsely implicated in the said crime. Therefore, the applicants have filed the petition for quashing of FIR before this Hon’ble Court which is pending for kind consideration as CRMP No. 1313/2022 and interim protection has already been granted for 45 days to move these bail applications on 16.08.2022. A copy of the said order dated 16.08.2022 is annexed herewith as Annexure-A/3. He also submits that the applicants are ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the conditions and directions which may be imposed by this Court. Therefore, the present applicants may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶29

On the other hand, counsel for the State however opposes the applications for anticipatory bail.

¶30

After hearing counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular nature of case and quality of the evidence, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants in connection with aforesaid crime number, they shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each, with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting/ investigating officer or the Court concerned, as the case may be, with the following terms and conditions:

¶31

(i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation

¶32

¶33

before the concerned investigating officer as and when required;

¶34

(ii) that the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts or the case as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶38

H.L. Sahu

Sangita Rai v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangita Rai 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

Harshdeep Ware Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sudhir Gajwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Baljeet Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shashikant Jogi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ajay Sharma Vs Mr. Naresh Kumar Verma

Rahul Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh