Chattisgarh High Court
Vijay Lal Markam vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 2 December, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8812 of 2022
Vijay Lal Markam S/o Shri Ramsingar Aged About 25 Years R/o
Rajkheta, Police Chouki Wadrafnagar, Police Station Basantpur,
District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Police Station Trikunda, District-
Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Curtis Collins, Adv.
For State/Respondent : Mr. Roshan Dubey, P.L.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
Order On Board
02/12/2022
1. The applicant has preferred the first bail application under Section
439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as he is in jail since 11.04.2022 in
connection with Crime No. 27/2022 registered at Police Station -
Trikunda, District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence
punishable under Sections 384, 506, 120B, 419 & 420 of the IPC.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 18.01.2022 at 11:00 am, the
applicant came to Mahadevpur Mungadih where the construction of
the pond was going, the applicant addressed himself as a reporter
and took photos and videos of the construction side and threatened
the complainant to publish the said photos and videos of the
construction. In return, the applicant asked for Rs. 1,50,000/- and was
given one week's time to arrange the said amount otherwise his Guru
Jitendra Jaiswal will publish the news and stop the construction. On
such demand the complainant requested that some amount could be
transferred by him then applicant suggested the name of his
acquaintance then the complainant transferred Rs. 15,000/- and on
16.03.2022 again the applicant threatened the complainant and
called him to Wadrafnagar and asked for the remaining amount of Rs.
1,35,000/- thereafter the complainant paid him Rs. 50,000/-. On such
demand, the complainant filed a written complaint. Based on this,
offence has been registered against the present applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation against
the present applicant is totally false and fictitious and the allegation
against the present applicant is with regard to demand of only Rs.
15000/-. He further submits that the present applicant is in jail since
11.04.2022, the investigation is completed and charge sheet has
been filed. He also submits that the offence is triable by Judicial
Magistrate First Class. He relied upon the judgment passed in the
matter of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40, and submits that looking to the
overtime detention period of the applicant the application may be
allowed.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail
application and submits that the allegation against the present
applicant is serious. However, he submits that as per charge sheet
there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the
rival submissions made by counsel for the parties, looking to the
nature of the allegation, and looking to the detention period of the
applicant, after relying in the judgment passed by the Supreme Court
in the matter of Sanjay Chandra (Supra), and the trial is likely to
take some time for its final disposal, without commenting anything on
merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application.
7. Accordingly, the bail application filed by applicant is allowed and it is
directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety for
the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. He
shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by
the said trial Court, till disposal of the trial.
8. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput)
Judge
H.L. Sahu
