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
19 paragraphs · 329 wordsSharad Kumar Gupta, J
This is first bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the applicant before this Court and his no bail application is pending
before any other court.
The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 1066/2018 registered in police station Durg Kotwali, Distt. Durg (CG) for offence
punishable under Section 420 and 201, IPC.
Perused the case diary.
Prosecution story in brief is that in the year 2015-16 complainant Smt. Purnima Sahu and the applicant entered into an agreement for construction
of a house on the land of the said complainant. Construction was to be done by the applicant. The applicant obtained pass book, Rin Pustika from the
complainant. He also obtained from her blank cheque, blank stamp papers. The constructed house along with land was sold by the registered sale
deed by the complainant to one Anurag Shrivastava. The buyer Anurag Shrivastava had given a cheque of Rs. 24 lacs to the complainant. The
complainant had given the cheque to the applicant for depositing the same in her account. The applicant deposited the said cheque in her account,
subsequently he transferred the said amount from her account to his bank account.
Counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent and falsely implicated. He further argued that he is in hail since 6-12-2018. There is
civil dispute between him and the complainant. The applicant had also given an application to S.P., Durg against the complainant and some other
persons. All documents are in favour of the applicant. The complainant's case is not supported by documents. Hence he may be released on bail.
On the other hand, the State Counsel opposed the bail application.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the huge amount of Rs. 24 lacs involved in the matter, this Court is not inclined to
grant bail to the applicant.
Consequently, the MCRC is dismissed.
