Shashibhushan Mahendra vs State Of Chhattisgarh

This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for grant of anticipatory bail, who has apprehension of being arrested in connection with Crime No. 517/2023, registered at Police Station– Kotra Road, Raigarh, District Raigarh (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a written complaint was filed on 06.12.2023 before police Station by the complainants alleging that while they were studying at Raipur for Bachelor of Engineering course then he along with his friends came in contact with the applicant, thereafter the applicant told that he is in contact with the higher officials of NTPC and many vacancies are there if they want to do job there then he will provide job of Junior Engineer in NTPC, thus fraudulently he received Rs. 50,000 from each of the complainant, total comes to Rs.2,00,000/- before Yashwant Mahto in the year 2018. It is alleged that neither job is provided, nor the money was refunded to them and on the allurement of providing job, the complainants were cheated by the applicant, thereby the offence has been committed.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and only on the basis of assumption the applicant has been implicated in the case. He would further submit that the allegation levelled in the FIR do not constitute any offence under Section 420 IPC. He would further submit that the allegation levelled against the applicant is general and vague, just to harass the applicant to rope him in a false case. He would further submit that it is purely a civil dispute not criminal case as an agreement regarding borrowing of money was executed between them but this fact has not been disclosed in the FIR by complainant. To substantiate his submission, he has referred to the Annexure A/2 which is an agreement executed on a stamp paper on 04.04.2018. He would further submit that the applicant and his wife are subjected to torture by the police, the police demanded Rs. 1,00,000/-from the applicant for settling the dispute when he could not fulfill the demand then the Police assaulted him therefore, the wife of the applicant made an application before Superintendent of Police, who in turn directed the Dy. SP to conduct enquiry. In the enqury she has narrated the incident of assault made by the police, still no action has been taken against the erring police officials and would pray for allowing the anticipatory bail.

Per contra, learned State Counsel as well as counsel for the objector would oppose the prayer and would submit that on allurement of providing job, amount has been received which the applicant did not return to the complainant and the allegation levelled against the applicant is serious in nature and would pray for rejection of the anticipatory bail .

On 13.02.2024 this Court directed for appearance of Dy. Superintendent of Police, Raigarh explaining as to what action has been taken in pursuance of allegation levelled by the wife of the applicant and fixed the case on 15.02.2024. In pursuance of direction given by this Court, on 15.02.2024 the Police Official appeared and would submit that during enquiry no CCTV footage is available as the CCTV was not in operation and statement of complainant i.e. wife of the accused was recorded.

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

Considering the fact and the statements of the complainants wherein no prima-facie material was placed by them with regard to payment of Rs. 2,00,000/- to the applicant but no material was placed on record how the payment was made or no receipt with regard to payment has been placed on record which can prima-facie corroborate with the fact of taking money by the applicant and connect the link of commission of offence, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail by the officer arresting on executing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 25,000/- of the applicant with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. The Applicants shall also abide by the following conditions:-

(i) That the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation before the concerned police officer as and when required;

(ii) That the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat undue influence to the prosecution witnesses;

(iii) That 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.

This Court vide its order dated 13.02.2024 has called the officer who has conducted enquiry on the complaint and has appeared along with the other officers with the record. From perusal of the Record it is quite vivid that no CCTV footage was considered in the enquiry, as such this Court has put the specific query to the concerning officers with regard to fact whether CCTV was in operation or not. It has been informed that the CCTV was not in operation condition, therefore, it is directed that the copy of the order be forwarded to Director General of Police, Raipur who shall issue necessary direction to all the Superintendent of Police, posted in the districts of the State to ensure utilization of CCTV installed in all the Police Stations and it should be monitored regularly by them. It is also directed that wherever the CCTV are not available steps should be taken for installation of CCTV in the Police Stations.