Sushil Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

dated 29-11-2024, passed by learned Special Judge (NIA) Rajnandgaon, in Bail Application No. 463 of 2024, whereby the regular bail application filed by the appellant under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been dismissed.

¶21

The appellant is an accused in Crime No. 6 of 2024, registered at Police Station Madanwada, District Mohla, Manpur, Ambagarh Chowki, for the offences under Sections 10, 13, 17, 38(1) (2) and 40 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC, and the Special Case No. 32 of 2024 is pending before the learned Special Judge (NIA) Rajnandgaon.

¶22

The case of the prosecution is that on 19-05-2024, a secret information was received by the police of Police Station Madanwada that two tractors, which was kept in the house of co-accused Arvind Tulavi was purchased by the funds provided by the Naxalites. The police has seized the said two tractors from his house and upon interrogation, it was found that the co-accused Mahesh Meshram, Sahadev Tulavi and Ram Kishan Yadav gave Rs. 7,50,000/- cash to the present applicant to purchase the tractor and the present applicant get Rs. 6,00,000/deposited in his bank account and paid the same to the tractor dealer as its consideration and the said tractor was given to another coaccused Ashok @ Baldev Reddy, who engaged in Naxalite activities at Kanker. After investigation, the charge sheet has been filed against the accused persons including the present appellant.

¶23

The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the present appellant was a Salesman in the Tractor Agency and presently he is a

¶24

3

¶25

Sales Manager. It is the common transaction of business that there cannot be cash transaction more than Rs. 2,00,000/- in business dealings and therefore the present appellant has deposited the amount in his bank account and transferred it to the account of dealer of the tractor and sold the tractor to the concerned person. The present applicant is nowhere concerned with the use of tractor by the person concerned and he is concerned only with respect to his commission of selling of the tractor. He was unaware about the fact that the person who is purchasing the tractor is engaged in any Naxalite activities or even he is nowhere concerned with the change of its number or any other manipulations.

¶26

He would also submit that there is no conspiracy or meeting of mind with the other accused persons to commit the offence. The appellant is in jail since 25.06.2024 and final adjudication of the case will take its own time, as only few of the witnesses have been examined in the case. The applicant is having no previous criminal antecedent and looking to the allegation against the appellant, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and has submitted that the amount of Rs 6 lakhs was deposited in the bank account of the appellant, by which the other co-accused persons have purchased the tractor, which were used in Naxalite activities. The tractor has been used in anti-national activities, which are the offence of serious nature and the appellant along with other co-accused persons

¶28

4

¶29

conspired together and engaged in commission of the offence. The trial of the case is in progress and therefore he is not entitled for bail.

¶30

We have heard the rival submissions of the respective parties and considered the same.

¶31

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegations against the appellant and the material collected against him during the investigation, further considering that the amount of Rs 6 lakhs were deposited in the bank account of the appellant, it clearly reveals from the document/Annexure A-2 annexed with the present bail application and the subject tractor has been purchased from the said amount, which is allegedly used in Naxalite activities by the other accused persons. Further, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and also that the trial is in progress, we are not inclined to release the appellant on bail.

¶32

Learned trial court has rightly considered the material available in the case and dismissed the bail application of the appellant, in which we are also in the agreement with the conclusion of the learned trial Court rejecting the bail application of the appellant.

¶33

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed .

¶34

Sd/Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶35

ved

Sushil Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arjun @ Payku Kunjam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anamika Dewangan (in Person) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kishan Das @ Radhe Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Sachin Ashok Kale (in Person) Vs Reserve Bank of India

Prabhakar Khobragadhe Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sandeep Thakur Vs State of Chhattisgarh