Shambhu Prasad Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh

The applicants have filed these applications for grant of anticipatory bail as they are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.03 of

2016 registered at Police Station Ramchandrapur, for the offence punishable under Sections 467.468.471,120-B,409 and 420 IPC.

As per case of the prosecution, the applicant along with other accused persons is said to have committed embezzlement of government money in

the course of sale/purchase of paddy for the Society at Kishannagar and Ramchandrapur in District Balrampur. These applicants have been made

accused by virtue of order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ramanujganj on 19.09.2017 when the Magistrate allowed the application

under Section 319 CrPC.

The contention of the applicants is that the identically placed person i.e. Vikas Kumar Agrawal have been granted anticipatory bail by this court on

07.12.2017 and the case of the present applicants and the allegations against each of the applicants are also similar/identical in nature. Therefore, the

applicants also deserve to be granted bail on the ground of parity. In addition, there is no evidence available against the applicants also as on date in

possession of the prosecution with which they could be prosecuted much less could be convicted in the said case. He further submits that as per the

statement of witnesses before the trial court, there is no material collected against the applicants during the course of investigation.

The State Counsel opposes the bail application on the ground that the nature of allegations against each accused persons is quite serious. The

applicants are also part and parcel for defrauding the State in respect of the embezzlement committed in the course of purchase of paddy.

Having considered the submissions on behalf of either side and on perusal of records what is undisputed is the fact that when the charge sheet was

filed by the prosecution in the court, none of the applicants were made accused which by itself would reveal that there was no material available

against them in the case diary or in the charge sheet. Another aspect is that except for the averment made by the witness before the trial court, the

prosecution has also not been able to collect any material against any of the accused persons with which the case of the prosecution could have been

established after having implicated them as accused persons. Moreover, the identically placed person namely Vikas Kumar Agrawal has already been

granted anticipatory bail by this court on 07.12.2017 in MCrC(A) No.893 of 2017.

Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also taking note of the fact that charge sheet was filed in the year, 2010 inspite of FIR

which was initially lodged in the year, 2006, and the applicants having been implicated as accused vide order dated 19.09.2017, this court is of the view

that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants.

Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a

bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer arresting them and they shall abide by all the following

terms and conditions:

That, the accused/applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation before the concerned Investigating Officer as and when required;

The accused/applicants 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 facts to the Court or to any police officer;

The accused/applicants shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

The applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Certified copy, as per rules.