Allowed

Budhram Bhardwaj v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC6 Mar 2023MCRCA/42/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed a first bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. affirming the applicant's apprehension of arrest. The court noted the dispute was settled, articles were recovered, and a co-accused had already been granted bail.

What did the court decide?

The application for anticipatory bail was allowed. The applicant is directed to be released upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety.

Budhram Bhardwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRCA No. 42 of 2023

¶5

Budhram Bhardwaj S/o Late Nankiram, Aged About 47 Years, Caste Satnami, R/o Barkelkhurd, Police Station Hasod, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate Janjgir- Champa Through - Station House Officer Police Station - Birra, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- State/Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Sumit Singh, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Dipti Shukla, Panel Lawyer.

¶11

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶12

06.03.2023

¶13

The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 143/2022 registered at Police Station Birra, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 392 and 34 of IPC.

¶14

As per prosecution story, on 20.10.2022 the present applicant alongwith 03 other co-accused persons namely Suresh Jatav, Mewa Lal Jatav and Toshiba Layan stopped Pick-Up vehicle bearing registration No. C.G. - 11/AB-6782 which was going towards Raipur and committed loot of 70 boxes of insecticides. On complaint made by Hemant Sahu, the police registered an F.I.R. for offence punishable under Section 392/34 of IPC against the present applicant and other co-accused persons.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that name of the present applicant was not arrayed in the FIR and later on, his name has been added as an accused. He would further submit that the matter has been settled between the parties, the looted articles have been seized from the

¶16

¶17

possessions of Suresh Jatav and Mewa Lal Jatav; the applicant was present on the spot at the time of incident, therefore, he has falsely been implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence. He would further submit that one of the co-accused namely, Toshiba Layan has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 02-032023 passed in MCRCA No.1698 of 2022. He would pray for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant.

¶18

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for the complainant.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶20

From case diary, it appears that on 20.10.2022 the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons committed loot of 70 boxes of insecticides, which was being transported in a Pick-Up vehicle bearing registration No. C.G. - 11/AB6782. Considering the fact that name of the present applicant was not mentioned in the FIR and later on his name has been arrayed as accused; the parties have settled the dispute; looted articles have already been recovered and same have been handed over to the complainant; and one of the co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, I a m inclined to extend the benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. to the applicant.

¶21

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

¶22

It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer subject to the following terms and conditions:-

¶23

i. he 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 fact to the Court or Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

¶24

ii. he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and

¶25

¶26

iii. he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶27

iv. he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future.

¶28

The observation made in the course of this order are only for considering the case of applicant on the application for grant of anticipatory bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by the observation

¶29

made in the course of this order.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶32

Aadil

Budhram Bhardwaj v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Budhram Bhardwaj 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

Mahendra Kumar Sinha Vs Mahesh Kumar Sinha

Chhotelal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mayashankar Yadav Vs Smt. Neelam Yadav

Yadurai Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sukhnandan Joshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

A Vs State of Chhattisgarh