Chattisgarh High Court
Mr. Shashi Ranjan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 4 February, 2022
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
M.Cr.C(A) No.1673 of 2021
Mr. Shashi Ranjan S/o Madan Sharma Aged About 48 Years R/o 21,
ShakuntalaNiwas, Dhamda Road, Kadambari Colony, Durg, Chhattisgarh
---- Applicant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bhilai
Nagar, District Durg, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-Applicant
For Applicant: Shri Prafull Bharat, Sr. Advocate along with Shri
Rahul Tamaskar and Ayush Bhatiya, Advocates.
For Objector: Dr NK Shukla, Sr. Advocate along with Shri Arjit
Tiwari and Ashwin Panickar, Advocates.
For Non-Applicant/State : Shri Alok Nigam, G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari
Order on Board Through Video Conference
04.02.2022
1.This 1st anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the Applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.585/2021 registered at Police Station - Bhilai Nagar, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC.
2. Prosecution case in brief is that with the consent of BPCL, the complainant had brought the accused/Applicant into the partnership with M/s Classic Fuels with 49% share for which, a consideration of Rs.80 lacs was settled and the Applicant paid Rs.5,40,000/- which he has taken back on account of meeting some emergency expenses, thereafter, the accused/Applicant proposed the complainant to purchase the entire stake for a consideration of Rs.1,70,00000 and gave one cheque amounting to Rs.10 lacs and two cheques amounting to Rs.2 lacs each and 1 cheque amounting to Rs.20 lacs to the Applicant with a promise to pay the remaining amount when the complainant returned from Kerala after conducting his daughter's marriage. During the period of 2019, the entire functioning of the petrol pump was in the hands of the Applicant and on return of the complainant, the Applicant has not permitted him to the petrol pump and alleged that he has been granted sole proprietorship. On an enquiry made by him, it was revealed that he was cheated by the accused, so he made a complaint to the BPCL Office, Mumbai on 21.01.2020 that some sort of forgery has been done by the Territory Manager of BPCL and his partner accused/Applicant to complete the sole ownership without his knowledge. The complainant has also made a complaint to the SP Durg on 16.02.2020, thereafter, the Applicant in the guise of negotiation/amicable settlement through a common friend Tahir Khan, forcefully took away four cheques amounting to Rs.34 lacs issued by him in favour of the complainant for which, Tahir Khan has also made a complaint to SHO, Bhilai Nagar on 28.02.2020.
3. On the complaint made to the SP Durg, SHO Bhilai Nagar, after conducting the preliminary enquiry, found that a non-cognizable offence has been made and the complainant has also duly transferred the ownership of the petrol pump in favour of the accused/Applicant, thereafter, the complainant examined the documents through a private hand writing expert and on the basis of photocopy signature of the disputed and admitted documents, FIR Crime No.585 was registered on 01.12.2020 at P.S Bhilail Nagar under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC.
4. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that there was no such agreement of Rs.1,70,000,00/- for total transfer of the petrol pump. The complainant and the Applicant agreed for Rs.90 lacs for total consideration of dealership whereas, the complainant has taken more than the amount that was agreed upon. The reconstitution of the Firm has been made at the behest of the complainant himself, who was heavily indebted and several complaints and criminal cases are pending against him. So in order to come out of debts, the complainant had requested and offered the Applicant to buy 51% of the remaining shares to become the full owner of M/s Classic Fuels and in pursuance of which, the complainant sought remaining payment out of total amount of Rs.90 lacs. As per the calculation, the complainant has received total amount of Rs.1,60,04,347/-, whereas more than Rs.40 lacs were paid through cash additionally. The complainant gave his resignation letter on 21.08.2019 to the Territorial Manager, whereas the resignation was signed before the Deputy Collector, Durg on 23.09.2019 and the resignation letter in the letter pad of the Firm is dated 24.09.2019. The BPCL gave approval for reconstitution on 01.10.2019 and called for interview on 15.10.2019, which took place in the presence of 3 independent witnesses. After completing all the formalities, the BPCL sent a letter on 30.12.2019 to the District Collector informing the Applicant as the sole signatory of the Firm M/s Classic Fuels.
5. Learned Sr. Advocate for the Applicant further submits that the offence was wrongly registered on the basis of the opinion of the private hand writing expert as the matter relates to a purely civil commercial transaction and only on the basis of the photocopy of the documents, the hand writing expert has given the opinion that in any event, the authenticity or otherwise of the said opinions will have to be seen at the trial of the case, therefore, prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the present Applicant.
6. Learned Sr. Advocate for the Objector opposed the bail application and submits that the Applicant is an influential person and had earlier influenced the investigation also. Even the District Administration Office affirmed the resignation though the Objector and his family had never gone to the said office and therefore, considering the huge fraud, the present Applicant is not entitled to be granted anticipatory bail.
7. Having considered the submissions put forth by learned Counsel for the parties and the documents annexed with the Petition and the objection as the P.S Bhilai Nagar had earlier investigated the matter and reached to the conclusion that the transfer of Firm M/s Classic Fuels was made in a proper manner and on 15.10.2019 the complainant and the accused/Applicant both have appeared before the interview committee, thereafter, the transfer of sole ownership of petrol pump has been affected, so the complainant has merely informed the non-
cognizable offence, thereafter, only on the basis of the photocopy of signature on the disputed document and the photocopy signature of the complainant, the complainant himself obtained the report from the private hand writing expert and lodged the FIR, therefore, this Court thinks that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the Applicant.
8. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the Applicant, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on the following conditions:-
(a) he shall make himslef available for
interrogation by the concerned police officer as
and when so required,
(b) he 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 them from disclosing such fact to the
Court or to any police officer,
(c) he shall not act in any manner which will be
prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial,
(d) after filing of the charge sheet, he shall appear
before the trial Court on each and every
date given to him by the said Court till disposal
of the trial,
(e) he shall not involve himself in any offence
of similar nature in future.
Sd/-
(Deepak Kumar Tiwari)
Judge
Priya