Salta Dhritlahre vs State Of Chhattisgarh

This first anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the Applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.13/15 registered at Police Station – Sahaspur Lohara, District- Kabirdham for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the IPC.

Prosecution case in brief is that the complainant / non-applicant no/02 had submitted a complaint under section 420, 467 466, 468, 471 & 120 B of the Indian Penal Code before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kabirdham, against present applicants herein on the pretext that applications for the post of Aaganbadi Karyakarta for Kauhari Centre were invited, in pursuvance to advertisment, present applicant no.01 Salta Dhritlahre and complainant / non- applicant no. 02 had submitted their applications. That applicant no.01 Salta Dhritlahre was selected in the post. As per the story of prosecution the Complainant/ non-applicant no.02 subsequently came to know that the applicant no.01 had by impersonation and showing to be the wife of applicant no.03 succeed to get appointed on the post, though she was not the wife of applicant no.03 but by cheating, manipulating documents achieved the goal mainly on such grounds, complainant/ non- applicant no.02 had filed complaint along with an application is filed U/S 156(3) of Cr.P.C. The learned Court below after perusal of documents and materials available on record vide order dated 25/11/2014 directed to the police station Sahaspur- Lohara to register an FIR, investigate the matter and submit Prativedan/report. Being aggrived by the order dated 24/1/2014 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Kabirdham,the present applicants had challenged aforesaid order dated 25/11/2014 before this Hon'ble Court in CR.M.P no. 1121/2014 Under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and this allowed the interim application and stayed the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 24/11/2014 by order dated 16/01/2015. During the pendency of the petition, counsel of the petitioners/ present applicants Mr. Malay Kumar Bhaduri passed away. The present applicant were not aware of the fact of sad and unfortunate demise of their counsel. This Court had issued SPC to the present applicants which was served on them on 03/01/2021 and before they could take appropriate action to appoint a new counsel, the case was listed on 14/01/2021 before this Court. Since no one appeared on behalf of the petitioners / present applicants even after service of SPC, this Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution.

The present applicants had filed petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. to restore the original petition Cr.M.P. 1124/2014 which was registered as Cr.M.P. 123/2021. This Court later allowed the aforesaid Cr.M.P. 123/2021 and restored Cr.M.P. 1124/2014 to its original number by its order dated 22/11/2021. It is pertinent to mention here that notice was served to complainant/ non-applicant no.02 in aforesaid petition but she was not represented by any counsel. After restoration of Cr.M.P. 1124/2014 and during pendency of the aforesaid petition, all of sudden, without any instruction or direction of this Court, incharge, police thana, Sahaspur Lohara, send a notice without mentioning any date on it and reference number, to applicants and directed them to produce the order sheets of case after dated 14/01/2022. It is pertinent to mention here this notice was received to applicants on 17/05/2023 after two years of the restotation of the Cr.M.P. 1124/2014 without any direction or instruction of this Court. Further, when the present applicants were went to the police station to submit order sheets of aforesaid Cr.M.P. 1124/2014, incharge, police thana refused to accept it and they were harassed and pressurized by the police to make compromise with the non-applicant no.02 and also make demand of money from present applicants money. It is pertinent to mention here that complainant/ non-applicant no.02 and applicant no.02 & 03 are resident of same village and from year 2011 when first time dispute arised between them, Complainant / non applicant no.02 has never made any complaint against the present applicants regarding harassment or pressuring her to enter into the compromise with applicants but only after interference by incharge thana, Sahaspur - Lohara, complainant / non-applicant no.02 has made false allegation against present applicants.

Mr. Mahesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in offence in question. He would further submits that all the allegations made in the FIR, even if taken to be true at its face without admitting it to be so, also do not constitute any offences punishable under Sections 420, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the IPC. The applicants are ready to abide by all the directions and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court while granting bail.

On the other hand, Mr. Avinash K. Mishra, learned Government Advocate for the non-applicant No.1/State, would oppose the bail application of the applicants.

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

Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and nature of dispute and material available in case diary, without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the Applicants.

Accordingly, the instant MCRC is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants-Salta Dhritlahre, Smt. Swati Banjare and Ramprasad Banjare, on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a) they 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 them from disclosing such fact to the Court.

(b) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.

(c) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

(d) the Applicants and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court.

(e) they shall not involve themself in any offence of similar nature in future.

(f) the applicants within one month from today shall clear entire outstanding towards bank and furnish certificate from the concerned bank and till such period, no coercive steps shall be taken against them. Within such period, if condition has not been complied with, the order shall lose its efficacy.