Sakti (C.G.) v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Makkharauda District
Case Details
KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 1 2025:CGHC:6137 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 171 of 2025 Santosh Kumar Gabel S/o Late Shri Puniram Gabel Aged About 47 Years Caste Gabel R/o Village Faguram Police Station Dabhra District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Makkharauda District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Bhaskar Payashi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order On Board 03/02/2025 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 245/2022 registered at Police Station – Malkharauda, District – Sakti (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that one Suresh Kumar Dube had obtained Rs. 4 lacks from the complainant Daleshwar Prasad 2 Chandra for securing job in SECL in the year 2011 and also obtained money from other persons also including Dwarika Prasad Gabel for securing job for his son Devendra Kumar Gabel. In all Suresh Kumar Dube obtained around 32,50,000/- from various persons. Present applicant is posted as Constable in Police Station Nagarda and has nothing to do with alleged offence, except the fact he being relative of Dwarika Prasad Gabel (Maternal Uncle of applicant) visited to accused in the year 2017 and asked him to repay the amount collected by accused from various persons otherwise complaint would be lodged. On which Suresh Kumar Dube (accused) issued 2 cheques worth Rs. 14,80,000/- and Rs. 6,70,000/-in favour of Devendra Kumar Gabel and Baratram respectively. On submitting the cheques to their respective bankers, same have been dishonored for which legal notices have been issued to the accused and appropriate proceeding Under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act have been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is posted as Constable in Police Station Nagarda and nothing to do with alleged offence, except the fact he being relative of Daleshwar Prasad Chandra visited to accused and asked him to repay the amount collected by accused from various persons. On which accused issued 2 cheques worth Rs.14,80,000/- and Rs. 6,70,000/- in favour of Devendra Kumar Gabel and Baratram. He further submits that Devendra Kumar Gabel and Baratram submitted cheques to their respective bankers, same have been dishonored for which legal notices have been issued to the accused and 3 appropriate proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act have been filed. Complaint Case filed by Devendra Kumar Gabel and Baratram are registered as Criminal Case No. 35/2018 and Criminal Case No. 12/2020 are pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class Malkaharauda and Sakti respectively. The applicant is in Government Job and holding the post of constable, therefore, he is being falsely implicated with intent to recover money paid to Suresh Kumar Dube from applicant, which has been paid by complainants. (including applicant's Maternal Uncle) to Suresh Kumar Dube. When applicant was called by concerned Police Station, applicant made request to the Inspector General, Bilaspur Range to get enquired the matter by some Senior OfÏcial, on which Inspector General, Bilaspur Range had directed the Sub-Divisional OfÏcer Police to enquire into complaint and submit the report. After conducting detailed enquiry, Sub-Divisional OfÏcer Police had submitted enquiry report to the Superintendent of Police, Range and also forwarded the same to the Police Station, Malkharauda by letter dated 16.08.2022. SDOP, in its enquiry report submitted that entire money has been paid to Suresh Kumar Dube and Rajkumar Gabel, Nomesh Gabel and Jaisingh Gabel are relatives of applicant Santosh Kumar Gabel and keeping enmity with him due to some disputes including matrimonial matter. He further submits that the accused Suresh Kumar Dube had purchased 3 stamp papers of Rs. 100 each on 17.10.2016, in presence of Rajkumar Gabel, Premshankar Gabel and Jitendra Gabel (brother of Jaisingh Gabel). The name of 4 applicant has been added as accused by Police Station in December 2024, even after being fully aware of the fact that cheques were issued by Suresh Kumar Dube, dishonor of cheques, filing of complaint case under the Negotiable Instrument Act against Suresh Kumar Dube and enquiry report dated 14.08.2022, submitted by Sub-Divisional OfÏcer Police. Accordingly, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant and submits that the anticipatory bail application of the co-accused namely Suresh Kumar Dube, has already been rejected by this Court being MCRCA No. 274/2024, vide order dated 26.04.2024 however, she submits that the main allegation is levelled against the co-accused whose bail application is rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents taken on record. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and further the fact that the bail application of the co-accused namely Suresh Kumar Dube, has already been rejected by this Court being MCRCA No. 274/2024, vide order dated 26.04.2024 however, from perusal of the case diary, it appear that the main allegation is levelled against the co- accused whose bail application is rejected but the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that case of co-accused therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to 5 be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Santosh Kumar Gabel on executing a personal bond with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting OfÏcer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) The Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) 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. (d)The Applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The Applicant shall not involve themself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal