Dismissed

Rajesh Chandgothia v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC13 May 2022ABLAPL/8529/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa rejected a prayer for pre-arrest bail filed by a clearing and forwarding agent accused of allowing re-packing of damaged Ambuja cement and selling it as genuine branded cement. The Court held it was not a fit case to grant bail due to the seriousness of the allegations and necessity of investigation.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was rejected and the application was dismissed.

Rajesh Chandgothia Vs State of Odisha — Cheating and Forgery | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

ABLAPL No.8529 of 2021

¶3

Rajesh Chandgothia.

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

M/s. Rajjeet Roy, S.K. Singh, S. Sourav, S.S. Mohanty, D.B. Ray, Advocates

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha.

¶8

…. Opposite Party Addl. Standing Counsel

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE S. PUJAHARI

¶11

Order No.

¶12

¶13

O R D E R 13.05.2022

¶14

1. The petitioner apprehending his arrest in

¶15

Jagatpur P.S. Case No.535 of 2020 registered under Sections 420, 468, 471/34 of IPC corresponding to G.R. Case No.2931 of 2020, in the court of the J.M.F.C.(R), Cuttack, has filed this application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail.

¶16

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶17

and the learned counsel appearing for the State. Perused the FIR and other papers on record vis-à-vis

¶18

Page 1 of 5

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

the contentions raised by the petitioner vide his application.

¶21

3. The petitioner is a Director of Phoenix Ispat Private Limited which is a Clearing and Forwarding Agent of Ambuja Cement in Cuttack, Odisha. It is alleged by the prosecution that the charge-sheeted accused – Devesh Joshi with the knowledge and under direction of the petitioner was recycling the damaged Ambuja cement and selling the same in market by forging the Ambuja Brand cement packets and thereby was cheating the consumers. The I.I.C., Jagatpur Police Station acting upon the reliable information regarding the incident, raided the godown owned by the petitioner, detected huge stock of damaged cement with storage of repacked Ambuja cement bags inside the godown premises. He also noticed the labourers being engaged in uploading Ambuja cement branded packs / bags in a truck standing in front of the godown of the petitioner. As alleged, the IIC came to know from Debesh Joshi and

¶22

Page 2 of 5

¶23

// 3 //

¶24

labourers that the damaged cement being mixed with fresh stock and repacked in the Ambuja branded bags were being sold in market for fetching high profit. The IIC, Jagatpur Police Station drew up plain paper FIR which was registered and upon investigation chargesheet has been filed against the co-accused – Debesh Joshi under Sections 420, 468, 471/34 of IPC leaving the investigation open under Section 173(8) of Cr.P.C.

¶25

and arrest of the present petitioner-co-accused.

¶26

4. The learned counsel appearing for the

¶27

petitioner submitted, inter-alia, that the allegations made vide the FIR and other police papers hardly constitute the offences alleged and there being no complaint or allegation either from “Ambuja Cement” or any consumer, the offence of cheating is primafacie not made out. It is his further submission that

¶28

there is no material showing involvement of the petitioner and merely because the godown belonged to him, he is sought to be indicted for the alleged offences on the basis of the alleged statement of co-

¶29

Page 3 of 5

¶30

// 4 //

¶31

accused – Debesh Joshi. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the petitioner hails from a reputed family having deep root in the society and he is the sole bread winner of his family.

¶32

5. The learned counsel appearing for the State is opposed to the move on the ground of the seriousness

¶33

of the crime.

¶34

6. To reiterate, the I.O. has already submitted charge-sheet against the co-accused. As indicated in the said charge-sheet, the investigation has been left open for arrest of the present petitioner, and obviously for collection of further evidence, if any. Taking note of the seriousness of the allegation and having regard to the prima-facie materials on record showing the petitioner-C&F Agent to have allowed the re-packing of the damaged cement in the branded packet of Ambuja Cement for disposal of the same in the market, and there being the necessity of custodial interrogation of the petitioner for collection of further

¶35

Page 4 of 5

¶36

// 5 //

¶37

evidence, this Court does not find it to be a fit case to allow pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Hence, the prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

¶38

7. Accordingly, the ABLAPL stands disposed of

being dismissed.

MRS

( S.Pujahari )
Judge

Page 5 of 5

Rajesh Chandgothia v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Chandgothia v. State of Odisha

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

Bishnupriya Sahoo Vs Kunal Kumar Sahoo

Mariam Bibi Vs Raju Ali Khan

Sasmita Sethi Vs Pratap Kumar Sethy

Pradeep Kumar Dash Vs State of Odisha

Anirudha Patra Vs R.T.O.,Bbsr I

Srinibash Mallick Vs State of Orissa