Sunil Malakar vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2023 Latest Caselaw 527 Chatt

                                       1

                                                                       NAFR


             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                        MCRCA No. 1507 of 2022
    Sunil Malakar S/o Moti Malakar Aged About 52 Years R/o
     Ramanujganj, Ward No. 08, Police Station Ramanujganj, District
     Balrampur - Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                ---- Applicant
                                     Versus
    State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Police Station Ramanujganj, District
     Balrampur - Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.
                                                            ---- Respondent

For Applicant                    :    Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Adv.
For Respondent/State             :    Ms. Priyamvada Singh, Dy. G.A.



                  Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey
                             Order on Board
25/01/2023

1. This application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 318/2022 registered at Police Station- Ramanujganj, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for commission of the offence punishable under Section 420 of the IPC.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that complainant Usha Devi lodged FIR in the year 2022 alleging therein that applicant had executed the registered sale deed dated 12.12.2017 in favour of Usha Devi and had obtained an amount of Rs. 19,65,000/-. It is also alleged that subsequently the complainant came to know that the land sold by the accused bearing Khasra No. 63/28 & 63/29 total area 10 dismil does not belong to the applicant. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He next submits that the land Khasra No. 63/28 & 63/29 total area 0.30 dismil, situated at Ring Road, Ward No. 6, Ramanujganj was belongs to Anarva Devi,

Rati, Manoj & Sister of Anarva Devi. All the owners executed the gift deed on 30.10.2015 in favour of Sunil Malakar. Annexure - A/3 is the copy of the gift deed. In pursuance of the said gift deed the name of the applicant was recorded in revenue records. Annexure - A/4 is the copy of the B-I, Kistbandi Khatoni. Since the applicant was in possession of the said property and was recorded owner, therefore the applicant executed the sale deed in favour of the complainant on 12.12.2017. Annexure - A/5 is the copy of the relevant portion of the sale deed. All of sudden after near about 4 years Anarva Devi & 3 others made a complaint to the police and the same was registered as Crime No. 106/2019. The police has also filed the charge sheet and criminal case No. 263/2021 is pending under consideration. Annexure- A/6 is the copy of the FIR lodged by Anarva Devi & Others. The bail has already been granted by the learned trial Court itself. In crime No. 106/2019 the statement of the complainant and Usha Devi was also recorded by the police and in view of the statement of Usha Devi, it is apparent that she was supporting the applicant in crime No. 106/2019 and subsequently by taking the somersault she made another complaint and the FIR has been registered. He further submits that on 03.11.2022 ad-interim bail was granted till disposal of this bail application to the applicant. The applicant is ready to abide by all the directions and conditions which may be imposed by this Court. therefore the present applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Sumedh Singh Saini vs. State of Punjab and Another, reported in 2020 SCC OnLine SC 986.

4. On the other hand, counsel for the State however opposes the application for anticipatory bail.

5. After hearing counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the quality of the evidence, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with aforesaid crime number, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned

arresting/investigating officer or the Court concerned, as the case may be, with the following terms and conditions:

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the concerned investigating officer as and when required;

(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts or the case as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

(iii) that the applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and

(iv) that 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.

Sd/-

(Rajani Dubey) Judge

H.L. Sahu