Satish Agrawal vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Sinha, J

This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 373/2020 registered at Police Station – Baradwar, District – Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The prosecution story, in brief, is that the F.I.R. of the incident was lodged on the instance of Dhruv Kumar Agrawal S/o Mahaveer Prasad Agrawal on 24.12.2020, in respect of the incident alleged to have been committed on 28.02.2012. The F.I.R. was lodged inter alia on the allegations that, the co-accused namely Sushil Agrawal in the year 2012, when he was holding the post of counselor of Nagar Panchayat Naya Baradwar and was a member of PIC Naya Baradwar, has facilitated his own brother namely Satish Agrawal (applicant herein) and nephew Shantanu Agrawal for obtaining the false income certificate and got the order of allotment of one shop i.e. Shop No. 8 for his nephew Shantanu Agrawal and thereby caused loss to the State Government. It has been alleged that, Shantanu Agrawal made an application for allotment of the shop under Mukhyamantri Swawlamban Yojna and has shown his income as 90,000/- per year, whereas the income certificate of 25,000/-was issued by Nayab Tehsildar Baradwar. It has been further alleged that Shantanu Agrawal has suppressed his income and thereby they have committed the offence. Hence, this application.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the incident was occurred on 28.02.2012, and the FIR was lodged in the year 2020 i.e. after 8 years of delay, further the bail application of the co-accused namely, Sushil Agrawal has been allowed vide order dated 23.01.2025 passed in MCRCA No. 126/2025. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in this case.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, and from the perusal of the case diary it transpires that the incident was occurred on 28.02.2012, and the FIR was lodged in the year 2020 i.e. after 8 years of delay, further the bail application of the co-accused namely, Sushil Agrawal has been allowed vide order dated 23.01.2025 passed in MCRCA No. 126/2025, at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court  is  of  the  view  that  the  applicant  is  entitled  to  be  granted anticipatory bail in this case.

Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Satish Agrawal on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a) The Applicant 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.

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

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

(d) The Applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court.

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