Indra Kumar Bhagat vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Heard finally.

As the accused/applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.172/2017 registered at Police Station Vidhan Sabha, Raipur for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 IPC, he filed this application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.

Case put-forth by the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant was employee of Pheonix Infra State International Ltd. Raipur (for short the “Company”) and working as marketing agent. The complainant has invested the amount of Rs.5,78,030/- in the Company in the year 2008 for purchase and construction of a plot but after passing of few days the Company was closed and absconded. It is alleged against the applicant that he has executed the said agreement having power of attorney on behalf of the Company. Thereafter, the complaint was registered against the applicant and other co-accused who were involved in the aforesaid crime.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. Counsel further submits that though the applicant was employee in the said Company but he was not director of the Company and was only authorized signatory to sign the agreement. The applicant had not received any amount for any agreement nor made any transaction for the said agreement. Learned counsel further submits that in another criminal case bearing Crime No.209/2018 registered under Section 420, 34 IPC against the applicant, the applicant has been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide MCRC(A) No.1731/2018 on 18.01.2018. Learned counsel submits that considering all these aspect if the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he would abide by all terms and conditions imposed on him while granting bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel raised objection to the prayer for anticipatory bail.

Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case particularly considering the role of the present applicant in the aforesaid crime and that he was employee of the Company and had not gained any amount in his account, this Court is of the view that the applicant can be granted anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a) he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required,

(b) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court or to any police officer,

(c) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial,

(d) after filing of the charge-sheet, he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial,

(e) he shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future.