Razia Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer Police Station Surajpur, District –

: Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. UKS Chandel, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board

26.03.2025

This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 558/2024 registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District – Surajpur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that since last one year the complainant RAJSHEKHAR SONI RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 Vishal Gupta is in touch with Ashfaqullah, Zarif Ullah and Shahrukh Ansari. In June, 2024 the co-accused Ashfaqullah told the complainant that his father Zarif Ullah works in Adani share market and has a good knowledge and the investment made in the company and amounts are doubled in 35 days. After a week Ashfaqullah with his father Zarif Ullah and Shahrukh Ansari came to the house of the complainant and said to invest 10 lakh Rupees with an assurance that the amount will be doubled in 35 days to which the complainant denied but for gaining the confidence the co-accused persons have a post dated cheque 647941 worth Rs. 10 Lakhs because of w3hich the complainant agreed to give 10 lakh Rupees which he gave through RTGS. After a month when the complainant asked for return of the amount then the accused persons started avoiding them and in August, 2024 when the complainant went to the house of the accused persons asking for his amount there the complainant was threatened to life. Hence, this application.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the co-accused persons are granted regular bail by this Court vide orders dated 12.02.2025, and 06.03.2025, passed in MCRC Nos. 486/2025 and 1832/2025. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicants are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail in this case.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 3

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant, and from the perusal of the case diary it transpires that the co-accused persons are granted regular bail by this Court vide orders dated 12.02.2025, and 06.03.2025, passed in MCRC Nos. 486/2025 and 1832/2025, at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case.

Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants – Razia Khatun and Nur Jahan 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 Rajshekhar