AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard finally.
As the accused/applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.242/2021 registered at Police Station Mana Camp Raipur, District Raipur for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 34 IPC, he filed this second application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail. The first application u/s. 438 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant was rejected by this Court on 04.03.2022 in MCRCA No.25/2022.
Case put-forth by the prosecution, in brief, is that on 02.12.2021 an FIR was lodged by one Sapan Mandal – the director of the MM Fish Seed Cultivation Ltd to the effect that one Nitin Krishnani the director of Asiatic Motors, along with the present applicant had prepared a forged RC Book of Merecedes ML 250 bearing registration NO. CG-12-AM-3456 and sold the same. The complainant herein had purchased the said vehicle for Rs.19 Lacs and after using the same for about 9 months he sold it to one Amar Malhotra who in turn sold out to one Satendar Singh Chahal for Rs.21 Lacs. When Satendar Singh Chahal initiated the proceedings for change of the owner’s name in the RC Book, he came to know that the said vehicle was financed by Daimler Financial Service India Pvt. Ltd. It is alleged that as certain amount outstanding, NOC was not issued and certain manipulations were also made in the RC Book. Therefore, the complaint was lodged and offences were registered against the present applicant and the co-accused.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that now the matter has been been settled between the concerned parties. He further submits that complainant has also drawn the compromise deed on 31.03.2022 and other co-accused have already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 03.02.2022 in MCRCA No.1661/2021 therefore, the appellant may be granted anticipatory bail. He has annexed supported documents along with the petition.
On the other hand, learned State counsel raised objection to the prayer for anticipatory bail. However, today complainant appeared before this Court and submits that out of 19 Lacs Rs.10 Lacs have transferred through RTGS mode and Rs.9 Lacs received through cash from the applicant and now no dispute has remained with the applicant. Adhar Card of the complainant has been duly verified by the learned State counsel.
Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering that the complainant himself entered into compromise and also received concerned amount, 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.50,000/- with two sureties 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) 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.