Gautam Kundu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 604 of 2024

¶5

Gautam Kundu S/o Nirmal Kundu Aged About 54 Years Residence of 34/F.T.I. South City 375 Prince Anwar Sah Road Jodhpur Park, S. O. Jodhpur Park Kolkata West Bengal

¶6

------Applicant

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer - Police Station - Kawardha, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh)

¶9

------- Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Arvind Sinha, Advocate. For Non-applicant : Ms. Subhra Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD

¶12

13/02/2024

¶13

Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 362/2015 registered at Police Station – Kawardha District Kabirdham (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 420, 406/34 of IPC and Section 3, 4, 5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.

¶14

Case of prosecution in brief is that complainants Dharmesh Chandravanshi and Panchram Chandravanshi lodged a written report against the present applicant and Abir Kundu, Shivmoy Dutta, Ashok Kumar Saha who are directors of Rose Valley Hotels and Entertainment Limited Company at Branch Office, wherein it is alleged that they have collected the amount from the complainants on the assurance that they will be paid higher rate of interest than that of Bank. However, the amount matured is not refunded and the Branch Office was closed. It is alleged that the present applicant being a Director of the Company was involved in inducing the investors to invest the amount with the Company including the complainant. During course of investigation, applicant was arrested on 29.07.2022.

¶15

Learned counsel for applicant submits that he applicant has has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned crime. There is no evidence

¶16

2

¶17

with regard to commission of crime by the present applicant and only on the basis of memorandum of other accused, applicant has been arrested. It is further argued that in other two similar offences, coaccused Ashok Kumar Saha, Abir Kundu and Prasad Bannerjee have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 10848/2022 and MCRC No. 8997/2023 and MCRC No. 295/2024 respectively and the role played by the present applicant is similar to of the aforesaid accused person. Applicant is in jail since 29.07.2022, and trial may take some time to conclude, hence, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶18

Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and submits that looking to the seriousness of offence, and applicant being one of the Directors of the Company indulged in collecting the money from the investors without there being any license from RBI or SEBI, applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

Taking into consideration nature of allegation, in particular the submission of learned counsel for the applicant that other similarly situated Directors of the Company have been enlarged on regular bail in MCRC No. 10848 of 2022, MCRC No.8997 of 2023 and MCRC No. 295/2024 (some in other crime), and further that conclusion of trial may take some time, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the application.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that-

¶22

a) Applicant shall appear before the Trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance. b) The applicant shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶23

c) If the applicant is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of Bail.

¶24

Certified copy as per rules.

¶25

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶26

/pawan

Gautam Kundu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gautam Kundu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Thakur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shiva Kumar Chandravanshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bilal Khan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gajendra Chandravanshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ganesh Das Manikpuri Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anto Kumar Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh