High CourtsSingle Bench

Kamlesh Kumar Tandey vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 16 April 2019 · Citation: (2019) 04 CHH CK 0107

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 420, 467, 468
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case (MCRC) No. 2356 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 366 words

Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, J

1.

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.110/2019, registered at Police Station - Civil Lines, Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

2.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The only role that the applicant has played is that he had shown the land for sale to the complainant and he had not participated in the negotiation of the sale. Complainant Smt. Jyoti Sunani and applicant have entered into compromise to settle their dispute, regarding which a compromise deed has been filed by the complainant and the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 28.02.2019 and there is no requirement of his detention any further. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

3.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and the submission made in this respect.

4.

I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary.

5.

According to the prosecution case, this applicant had shown the land belonging to one Sarita Singh which was purchased by the complainant by a registered sale deed. Later on complainant came to know that the name of Sarita Singh was not recorded in the revenue papers, therefore, she had filed the complaint.

6.

After considering the entire material present in the case and also that a compromise took place between the applicant and the complaint, this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which, the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail.

7.

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed.

8.

It is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for his appearance as and when directed.