Chattisgarh High Court
Lucky Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 2 May, 2024
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Rajani Dubey
Neutral Citation
2024:CGHC:15928
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 311 of 2024
Rakesh Kumar Jain S/o Shri Nathu Ram Jain Aged About 58
Years R/o Vikas Provision Stores, Bti Road Mahasamund, Police
Station, Tahsil And District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police
Station- Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
And MCRCA No. 375 of 2024 Lucky Singh S/o Rajendra Singh Aged About 40 Years R/o In Front Of Raja Masjid Ward No. 13 Mahasamund Thana, Tehsil And District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent (Cause title is taken from CIS Software) For Applicants : Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Smita Jha, Advocate in MCRCA No.311/2024 & Ms. Priyanka Rathi, Advocate in MCRCA No.375/2024. .
For Respondent/State : Mr. Hari Om Rai, Panel Lawyer.
Division Bench :
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Smt. Rajani Dubey, Judge Order on Board 02/05/2024
1. Since the aforesaid anticipatory bail applications arise out of the same crime number and listed with CRMP No.864/2024 today, Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:15928 2 they are being disposed of by this common order.
2. These applications under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been filed by the applicants who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.137/2024 registered at Police Station - Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 306, 34 of IPC.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on dated 11.03.2024 at around 14:30, the informant Umesh Sharma registered a merg intimation at Police Station to the effect that his brother Abhishek who was working as a contractor in Mahasamund since four years was residing in Mahavir Park on a rented house. On 11.03.2024 at about 11:30, the father of deceased Prakash Singh Raghuvanshi called the informant and stated that Animesh is not receiving calls thereafter, the informant went to the deceased's house and saw that door was locked from inside and even after knocking no response was received, thereafter he broke open the door and saw the deceased hanging from a thick rope inside the kitchen. On the basis of said information, merg no. 30/2024 was registered. During the merg inquiry, a suicide note was recovered from the deceased wherein it was stated that the applicants and other accused person harassing the deceased for recovery of money and because of this he committed suicide. Based on this, the police has lodged the FIR against the appellants.
4. Learned senior advocate appearing for the applicant in MCRCA Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:15928 3 No.311/2024 submits that the applicant had no transaction with the deceased and he did not give any loan to the deceased. The applicant had no conversation with respect to the harassment inflicted upon the deceased to recover the loan and the interest.
The deceased had taken loan from multiple people and in the suicide note there is no accusation against the applicant. Though the applicant has criminal antecedent (Crime No.92/2015) but the same is old and stale. Therefore, the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant in MCRCA No.375/2024 submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. It has been further submitted that the applicant never harassed the deceased nor had any animosity with him. The applicant has been roped in because some transaction had taken placed with deceased because he was having business terms with the deceased. It has been submitted that though the applicant has criminal antecedent (Crime No.507/2015) but the same is old and stale. Learned counsel also submits that even if the entire prosecution case is taken on its face value, no offence much less 306, 34 is made out against the applicant.
6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposing the bail applications submits that the applicants harassed the deceased to such extent that he had taken extreme step and recovery of suicide note wherein allegations have been levelled against the applicants clearly established their involvement in the crime in Neutral Citation 2024:CGHC:15928 4 question. Learned State counsel also submits that the applicants have two criminal antecedents.
7. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation and further considering the material available on record, we are inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants.
8. Accordingly, the applications are allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants Rakesh Kumar Jain and Lucky Singh, on executing a personal bond and one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on the following conditions :-
(i) They 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.
(ii) They shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial.
(iii) They shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
(iv) The applicants and the surety shall submit a copy of their adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court.
(v) They shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Rajani Dubey) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
PKD