Ajmul Ali vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 7567 Chatt

                                       1

                                                                        NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                               MCRC No. 7817 of 2022

     • Ajmul Ali S/o Shri Majhar Ali Aged About 35 Years R/o Chandani Chowk,
       Delhi

                                                                 ---- Applicant

                                    Versus

     • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station
       Takhatpur, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

                                                              ---- Respondent

For Applicant : Shri Pradeep Kumar Jogi, Advocate For State : Shri B.P.Banjare, Dy.G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

Order On Board

14/12/2022

Heard.

1. The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.52/2019 registered at Police Station - Takhatpur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) for alleged commission of offences under Section 420/34 of IPC.

2. Prosecution case is that a complaint was lodged by the complainant that the applicant dishonestly withdrew Rs.1,00,000/- by changing the ATM card.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is in jail since 30/03/2019 and he has already served 3 years and 9 months' jail sentence and the maximum punishment which can be imposed upon the applicant would be of 7 years. Therefore, Section 436 (A) of CrPC, since he has already served more than half of the sentence, the application may be allowed. He relies upon judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2012) 1 SCC 40 and Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & anr. reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 577.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that looking to the allegations, the application may be rejected.

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

6. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, detention period and in view of judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra (supra) and Satendra Kumar Antil (supra), I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- along with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court on the condition that -

a) He shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

b) He shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

It is made clear that if the applicant is found indulged in offence of similar nature, the State is at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput ) Judge Deepti