Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:546 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9131 of 2024 1 - Harry Joseph S/o Lio Joseph Aged About 47 Years R/o House No. 76, Som Gali, Near Leaner School, Kashimpara, Torwa, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.) versus ... Respondent For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Diwesh Kumar, Advocate & Ms. Deepali For State : Mr. Amandeep Singh, Panel Lawyer Gupta, Advocate (Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge) Order on Board 06/01/2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No. 426 of 2022 registered at Police Station – Sarkanda, District – Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34 of the I.P.C., 1860. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that one Prakash Singh obtained the documents of the relevant area under R.T.I. and found that revenue document bearing Khasra No. 1859/1 measuring 1.03 acres has been fabricated. The said land was initially recorded in the name of Hira Das who stated to have sold the land in the year 1972 to Amal Das and further it is on the basis of so called power of attorney in favour of Suresh Mishra, he sold the land to Harry Joseph and Vineet Mishra. Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 Based on the complaint, police investigated the matter and applicant has also been arrayed as one of the accused amongst others. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that as per the records available, land bearing khasra No. 1859/1 measuring 1.03 acres situated at village Chilhati, Bilaspur is recorded in the name of Amal Das in 1983-84 pursuant to the registered sale deed executed in his favour on 10.05.1972. He contended that as per the allegations as is available in the case diary, Suresh Mishra, has got the sale deed executed through Amal Das in favour of applicant and Vinit Mishra. Applicant has no role to play in getting the sale deed executed as he has not contacted with so called Amal Das at any point of time. He contended that there is no direct allegation against applicant of taking active part in getting the sale deed registered except that the part of the land bearing khasra No. 1859/1 is recorded in his name through registered sale deed. He also pointed out that Amal Das has been enlarged on bail in MCRC No. 1138/2024 on 19.02.2024 and Vinit Mishra has been enlarged on bail in MCRCA No. 1385/2024 on 17.12.2024. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of counsel for applicant and would submit that initially the land was recorded in the name of Hiradas and it was fraudulently sold in the name of Amal Das and thereafter Amal Das was contacted by Suresh Mishra and the land recorded in the name of Amal Das was sold in the name of applicant and Vinit Mishra. He contended that the applicant is witness in the sale deed executed in favour of Vinit Mishra and Vinit Mishra is witness in the sale deed executed in favour of applicant. However, upon asking, learned State counsel fairly submitted that in 3 the statement of Amal Das it has come that he was contacted by Suresh Mishra who made all arrangements for execution of sale deed in favour of Vinit Mishra and Harry Joseph. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused documents annexed along with the application. 6. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, in particular the allegations available in the charge-sheet against applicant is only that he got part of the land bearing khasra No. 1859/1 purchased through registered sale deed through Suresh Mishra from seller Amal Das, Amal Das and Vinit Mishra has been enlarged on bail, as also the submission of learned counsel for the parties, without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to enlarge applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that - (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance 4 with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Shayna Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE