Harish Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station - Tilda
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 88. to release him on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond for a sum…
Judgment
: Mr. Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sanjeev Pandey, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order On Board
27.03.2025
The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sahintha, for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested on 06.04.2022 in connection with Crime No. 176/2017, registered at Police Station Tilda Newra, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420,409, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 4, 5 & 6 of Price Chit Fund and Money SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA SANTOSH KUMAR SHARMA 2 Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005.
Case of the prosecution in brief is that the applicant being formal Director of Nirmal Infra home Corporation Limited, has accepted deposits from various customers and thereafter did not return the amount as promised, whereas the deposits were accepted under various fixed deposits scheme, also in some cases under the bond scheme. The said companies were not authorized by security exchange Board of India (SEBI) and Reserve Bank of India (RBI to conduct such business. On this, the Complainant and others invested their money in the said company. Later on, the company was closed and the Applicant absconded. On the basis of complaint, offence under Sections 420,409, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 4, 5 & 6 of Price Chit Fund and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005 has been registered against him.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He is innocent. He was only a Branch Manager of Tilda Branch of the said company (NICL). He never asked the Complainant or any of the investors to make investment in NICL. He is not responsible for any loss to the Complainant or any of the investors and if any responsibility lies, the same should be fastened on the Directors and Salesman of the company. He is in jail since 13.10.2017 in all other connected cases and he is a local resident. Therefore, he may be released on bail.
Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application. I have heard Learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused 3 the entire case diary with due care.
Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, that the Applicant was only a Branch Manager of one of the branches of the company, i.e., of Tilda Branch, he is in custody since 13.10.2017 in other connected cases and trial is likely to take time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined
Operative part
to release him on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court. He shall appear before the trial court on each and every date given by the said trial court, till disposal of the trial.
Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Santosh
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the bail application is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 409, 420; Banning Act, 1978; Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.