Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:28278 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2487 of 2025 Wasim Akram S/o Mushtaq Siddiqui Aged About 35 Years Occupation Business, R/o Village Phuljhar, Police Station Champa, Post Office Sanna, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. Present Address Rasulpur (Mominpura), P.S. And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Bagbahar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 4708 of 2025 Shahrukh Khan S/o Md. Shabbir Aged About 27 Years Occupation Private Job, R/o Village Khorma, Post Office Pratappur, P.S. And Tahsil Pratappur, District Surguja (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus The State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O., Police Station Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Non-applicant 2 MCRC No. 3647 of 2025 Wasim Akram S/o Mushtaq Siddiqui Aged About 35 Years Occupation- Business, R/o Village- Phuljhar, Police Station- Champa, Post Office- Sanna, District- Jashpur (C.G.) Presently R/o Rasulpur (Mominpura), Police Station And Tahsil- Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Ambikapur District- Surguja, (C.G.) --- Non-applicant MCRC No. 3640 of 2025 Wasim Akram S/o Mushtaq Siddiqui Aged About 35 Years R/o Village- Phuljhar, Police Station - Champa, District- Jashpur (C.G.), Presently R/o Rasulpur, Mominpura, Police Station - Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Rajpur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) --- Non-applicant For Applicants For Non-applicant : :
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Rishikant Mahobia & Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 26.06.2025 1. Since all the bail applications arise out of the same incident, therefore, they are being heard analogously and decided by this common order. 3 2. M.Cr.C. No. 2487 / 2025 has been filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 124 / 2024 registered at Police Station Bagbahar, District Jashpur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 379 read with Section 34 of the IPC. 3. M.Cr.C. No. 3640 of 2025 has been filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 74 / 2024 registered at Police Station Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramnujganj (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468 & 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC. 4. M.Cr.C. No. 3647 of 2025 has been filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 555 / 2024 registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120- B read with Section 34 of the IPC. 5. M.Cr.C. No. 4708 of 2025 has been filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 74 / 2024 registered at Police Station Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramnujganj (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468 & 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC. 6. [For the sake of convenience, M.Cr.C. No. 2487 / 2025 would be 4 taken-up as lead case] 7. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.08.2024, complainant made a written complainant alleging inter alia that he received RC Book through courier containing details of a vehicle bearing registration number CG 29 AG 1344, dated 06.02.2024, registered in his own name, which is financed by Hinduja Leyland Finance. It is alleged that neither he (complainant) nor his family member, had purchased the said vehicle nor given any document for finance of purchasing any new vehicle during the entire year. It is further alleged that relevant photocopy of the complainant’s documents got stolen from the dickey and misused by the applicant & other co-accused persons for finance of the aforesaid vehicle. Based on aforesaid facts, present crime has been registered against the applicant and other co- accused persons and they have been arrested. 8. Learned counsel for the respective applicants would submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the crime in question, as there is no evidence on record to connect them with the crime in question. It is further submitted that the incident had occurred on 15.01.2024 whereas FIR has been lodged on 09.09.2024, as such, there is an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR, which has not been explained. He submits that similarly situated co-accused person namely Manish David has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 2160 of 2025, hence, the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. He further submits that the applicants are languishing in jail since 03.11.2024, 12.12.2024 & 07.01.2025, respectively; charge-sheet has 5 already been filed and conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, hence, the applicants may be enlarged on bail. 9. Per contra, learned counsel for the State while opposing the bail applications would submit that looking to the gravity and seriousness of the crime and the manner in which, alleged offence of cheating is said to have been committed by the applicant, they are not entitled for grant of bail. He submits that case of Manish David, who is said to be co-accused of the case, is distinguishable to the case of the present applicants, as he is only Manager of Showroom, from where, the alleged vehicle has been purchased, and through him online transactions were made to the Showroom. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. 11. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts of the case, particularly, considering the nature & gravity of the offence, looking to the seriousness of the crime and the fact that case of co-accused namely Manish David is distinct from the present applicants because he is the manager of the Showroom, from which the alleged vehicles were purchased, and the online transactions were done in the showroom through him, thus, without commenting on merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 12. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant namely – (1) Wasim Akram , involved in Crime No. 124/2024, registered at Police Station Bagbahar, Distridt Jashpur for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467. 468, 471, 379 read with Section 34 of the IPC (2), Wasim 6 Akram, involved in Crime No. 74 / 2024 registered at Police Station Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramnujganj (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468 & 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC (3) Wasim Akram, involved in Crime No. 555 / 2024 registered at Police Station Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B read with Section 34 of the IPC & (4) Shahrukh Khan involved in Crime No. 74 / 2024 registered at Police Station Rajpur, District Balrampur-Ramnujganj (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468 & 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC, are rejected. 13. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 14. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/ Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice amita AMITA DUBEY Digitally signed by AMITA DUBEY Date: 2025.07.01 11:36:13 +0530