Chattisgarh High Court
Mohd. Shahbaj vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 5 January, 2023
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 10108 of 2022
• Mohammad Afzal S/o Late Mohammad Ishraiel Aged About 35 Years R/o.
Laxmipur, Raigarh, Police Station Kotwali, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Raigarh Kotwali, District :
Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
MCRC No. 10297 of 2022
• Karan Agrawal @ Karan Choudhary S/o Sanjay Choudhary Aged About 25
Years R/o Dhimrapur Chowk, Raigarh, Tehsil And District Raigarh (C.G.)
---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through-Ps City Kotwali, Raigarh District Raigarh
(C.G.)
---- Respondent
MCRC No. 10410 of 2022
• Mohd. Shahbaj S/o Mohd. Shamsheer Aged About 30 Years R/o Turkapara,
Chandni Chowk, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh (C.G.)
---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station City
Kotwali, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)
---- Respondent
&
MCRC No. 10233 of 2022
• Dharmendra Sharma S/o Devi Prasad Sharma Aged About 51 Years R/o
Kotra Road, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
---- Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge Police Station City Kotwali,
Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
For respective Applicants : Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Senior Advocate
with Shri Priyank Rathi, Shri Manoj
Paranjpe, Shri Ashutosh Mishra and Shri
Ashish Gupta, Advocates
For State : Ms. Deepti Shukla, Panel Lawyer
For Objector : Shri Krishna Tandon, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
Order On Board
05/01/2023
The aforesaid bail applications are being disposed off by this common
order as they arise out of the same crime number.
1. The applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime
No.1463/2022 registered at Police Station - Raigarh Kotwali, District -
Raigarh (C.G.) for alleged commission of offences under Section 452, 384,
306/34 of IPC.
2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that one Mayank Mittal alleged to have
lost Rs.50 -60 lakhs during IPL Cricket match in gambling and betting (satta).
The applicants used to call him for return of their money and therefore, he
committed suicide by hanging.
3. Learned senior counsel for the applicant - Karan Agrawal @ Karan
Choudhary submits that the deceased himself was involved in gambling and
betting (satta) and because of this habit, he lost to the tune of Rs.50 to 60
lakhs. The present applicant had given money to the deceased and when the
money was demanded back in natural course, the allegation is leveled back
and because of that pressure, the deceased committed suicide and therefore,
offence was registered. He submits that investigation is complete, charge
sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 27/10/2022. He further
submits that from the reading of the entire charge sheet, ingredients of
Section 306 of IPC is not made out. There is no continuous instigation which
bounded the deceased to commit suicide. Therefore, the applicant may be
granted bail. To substantiate his submission, learned senior counsel relies
upon judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of M. Arjunan v. State
represented by its Inspector of Police, (2019) 3 SCC 315 particularly
paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 and judgment of this Court passed on 11/09/2014 in
CRR No.136/2014 (Amit Gandhi v. State of Chhattisgarh) and CRR
No.199/2014 (Jhaggar @ Ramnaresh v. State of Chhattisgarh) paragraphs
16 and 17.
The arguments made by learned senior counsel were adopted by other
respective counsel and submit that ingredients of Section 107 IPC is lacking
and therefore, offence under Section 306 IPC cannot be attributed to the
applicants.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail applications
and submits that huge amount was borrowed by the deceased from the
applicants and the applicants were continuously threatening the deceased of
dire consequences if the amount is not returned back. It is submitted that
because of continuous pressure by the applicants, the deceased committed
suicide. It is submitted that ingredients of Section 107 IPC is available in the
case diary and therefore, case under Section 306 IPC is made out against the
applicants. She further submits that the applicant - Karan Agrawal @ Karan
Choudhary has seven criminal antecedents of gambling and betting (Satta).
She submits that there is possibility of applicants tampering with the evidence
and prosecution witnesses. Therefore, the applications may be rejected.
5. Shri Krishna Tandon, counsel for the complainant / author of the FIR
vehemently opposes the bail applications and submits that even assuming
that the amount was borrowed by the deceased from the applicants, but they
were continuously threatening and because of this pressure, he committed
suicide. Therefore, prima facie case under Section 384 and 306 / 34 IPC is
made out and looking to the evidence collected by the prosecution, the
applicants are not entitled for grant of bail.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
7. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, charge sheet has
been filed, the applicants are in jail since 27/10/2022 and reliance placed on
the judgments which have been cited by learned counsel for the applicants in
the case of M. Arjunan (supra) and CRR No.136/2014 and other connected
matter, considering the totality of the circumstances, without commenting
anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants.
8. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. It is directed that the
applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal
bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety for the like amount to
the satisfaction of the trial Court on the condition that -
a) They shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every
date, unless exempted from appearance.
b) They shall not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution
witnesses.
It is made clear that if any of the conditions is violated by the applicant
and brought to the notice of the trial Court, learned trial Court is at liberty to
cancel the bail granted to the applicants.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Sachin Singh Rajput )
Judge
Deepti
