Brinda Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

Page No.1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 4389 of 2024

¶5

Sanjay Sahu S/o Mangalu Ram Sahu Aged About 20 Years R/o Sarsiwa, Thana Sarsiwa, Distt - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh. 2. Mithlesh Sahu S/o Premlal Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Raykona, Thana - Sarsiwa, Distt - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Applicants(in jail)

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Sarsiwa, Distt - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

MCRC No. 4165 of 2024

¶11

Brinda Sahu S/o Situ Sahu Aged About 37 Years R/o Ward No. Fulwaripara Jaijaipur, Thana- Jaijaipur Distt- Sakti ( C.G.).

¶12

---- Applicant(in jail)

¶13

Versus

¶14

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Sarsiwan, District- Sarangarh ( C.G.).

¶15

---- Respondent

¶16

MCRC No. 4246 of 2024

¶17

Tikaram Sahu S/o Tulsiram Sahu Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Raykona Thana Sarsiwa District Sarangarh Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶18

---- Applicant(in jail)

¶19

Versus

¶20

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Sarsiwan, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶21

---- Respondent

¶22

----------------------------------	-----------------------------------------------------------------
For Applicants	: Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State	: Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. Adv. General.

¶23

Page No.2

¶24

S.B.:Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board

¶25

23/07/2024

¶26

As the above bail applications arise out of the same crime number, they are being disposed of by this common order.

¶27

Both these applications filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the applicants for grant of regular bail to them as they are in custody in connection with Crime No.131/2024 registered at Police Station Sarsiwa, DistrictSarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 120-B, 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 6 & 10 of Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.

¶28

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that applicant Brinda Sahu contacted complainant Saurabh Agrawal, Vishwajit Khandekar, Tarun Sahu, Deepak Agrawal, Kamal Pradhan and informed them that as per scheme, Shiva Sahu accepting deposit of amount and returning back double the amount within 8 months and monthly return of the amount at the rate of 30%. Relying upon the words of applicant Brinda Sahu, complainants approached Shiva Sahu discussed with him and thereafter as per whatsapp chat, they handed over a total sum of Rs.2 Crore in cash to Jhagesh Sahu. However, after some time when they realized that they had been cheated, report was lodged in concerned police-station.

¶29

Learned counsel for applicants would submit that applicants have been falsely implicated in instant crime. They have not committed any offence as alleged. Main allegation of accepting deposit is against Shiva Sahu and at the most, co-accused Jhagesh Sahu to whom the amount was handed over by the complainant. There is no role of applicants in discussing with complainants about the scheme

¶30

Page No.3

¶31

of deposit, as mentioned in their complaint, and further applicants have not accepted the cash amount from any of the complainants. Applicants are in jail since 25.3.2024 & 6.5.2024 hence, they may be enlarged on regular bail.

¶32

Learned State Counsel opposing the submissions made by counsel for applicants, would submit that in written complaint it has been specifically pleaded that it is Brinda Sahu, who allured the complainants by telling them about the scheme and only thereafter the complainants have approached Shiva Sahu in his office and handed over money. Hence, applicant Brinda Sahu has played active role in commission of offence. He also submits that at the time when complainants were allured by applicant Brinda, applicant Mithlesh Sahu was also present there.

¶33

When the Court specifically posed question to learned State counsel with respect to the role of other applicants i.e. Tikaram Sahu, Sanjay Sahu and Mithlesh Sahu after going through the case diary, he submits that there is no direct allegation against Sanjay Sahu, however, there is mention in written report about presence of Sanjay Sahu and Mithlesh Sahu along with Brinda Sahu. Upon further asking whether any amount has been handed over to these applicants Tikaram Sahu, Sanjay Sahu and Mithlesh Sahu, he submits that in written report no such allegation is levelled that the complainants have handed over any cash amount to these applicants for depositing the same with Shiva Sahu.

¶34

At this stage, learned counsel for applicant submits that he is not pressing bail application of applicant Brinda Sahu i.e. MCRC No.4165 of 2024, and seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the same.

¶35

Page No.4

¶36

In view of the above submission, the bail application of applicant Brinda Sahu bearing MCRC No.4165 of 2024 is dismissed as not pressed.

¶37

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶38

10.Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, in particular submission of counsel for State based on the written report lodged by the complainants mentioning that they have discussed the scheme with Shiva Sahu and thereafter handed over cash amount to Jhagesh Sahu, the offence to be triable by JMFC, charge-sheet is filed, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to allow bail application of applicant Tikaram Sahu, Sanjay Sahu and Mithlesh Sahu.

¶39

11.Accordingly, M.Cr.C. No.4246/2024 & MCRC No.4389/2024 filed on behalf of applicants Tikaram Sahu, Sanjay Sahu and Mithlesh Sahu are allowed and it is directed that they shall be released on bail, on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned on the conditions that;

¶40

they shall appear before the trial Court concerned regularly on each & every date unless exempted from appearance.

¶41

they shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶42

If applicants are found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail.

¶43

Certified copy as per rules.

¶44

Nisha

¶45

Sd/( Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

Brinda Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brinda Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dudhnath Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ashok Talmale Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dhanvantri Chemicals Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dipesh Nahariya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Tikaram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh