High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 05 CHH CK 0005

Adesh Kushwaha And Ors vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 12 May 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
NK Chandravanshi, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Misc. Criminal Case No. 1188, 1475 Of 2021

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

24 paragraphs · 492 words

NK Chandravanshi, J

1.

As both these MCRCs arise out of same crime number of same police station, they are being heard together and disposed of by this common order.

2.

These are first bail applications filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been

arrested on 29-12-2020 in connection with Crime No. 1210/2020 registered at Police Station Sarkanda, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence

punishable under Sections 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, complainant, who is Sr. Executive of TSI India Pvt Ltd. lodged a complaint in the PS Sarkanda that his

company TSI India Pvt Ltd. installs ATMs in entire CG and maintains them. On 26-12-2020 it was found that some unknown persons have withdrawn

total Rs. 29,000/- by using ACM card No. 6069942190308484. On the basis of the report offence under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code was

registered against the applicants. During investigation, police caught the accused persons on suspicious condition. On memorandum of accused Babu

Singh Nishad, one ATM card of Bank of Baroda, cash Rs. 20,000/-, one mobile and press card 2 nos. were seized, on memorandum of accused Ankit

Nishad , one ATM car of Union Bank, one debit card of Axis Bank and one mobile was seized, on memorandum of Accused Ajit Nishad 3 debit

cards of Axis Bank, one Adhar Card, PAN Card and 2 mobiles, from applicant Adesh Kushwaha one while Swift Dezire car, one Rupay card of

Bank of Baroda, one RC book, one driving licence, Green Remit card of SBI, one PAN card and one Identity card of UP police were seized. The

accused were arrested and offence was registered.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated. He further submits that the applicants are in jail since 29-

12-2020, the applicants will not abscond if bail is granted, they will not commit any offence in future, therefore, present applicants may be enlarged on

bail.

5.

On the contrary, learned State counsel opposes the applications for grant of bail.

6.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention and also considering the fact that the trial will

take some more time for its conclusion, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicants on bail.

7.

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on

each of their furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court.

They shall appear before the trial court regularly on each and every date as per direction of the court, unless exempted from appearance.

Certified copy as per rules.