Chattisgarh High Court
Govind Kumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 January, 2024
Page No.1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 26 of 2024
• Govind Kumar S/o Bhikha Prasad Aged About 24 Years
R/o Village- Keshi, Baraur, Ps- Baraur, District : Kanpur Nagar,
Uttar Pradesh
---- Applicant(in jail)
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho Ps- Gariyaband,, District :
Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh
---- Non-applicant
_____________________________________________________________
For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Ms. Shubha Shrivastava, PL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S.B.:Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 19/01/2024
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the applicant for grant of regular bail to him as he is in custody in connection with Crime No. 186/2023 registered at Police-Station-Gariyaband, District-Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 24.06.2023 when the persons managing the ATM Machines went to refill cash amount in the ATM, they found that Rs.3,48,500/- short in the ATM Machine account, thereafter they traced the CCTV footage upon which applicant and co- accused persons were found to be withdrawing huge amount of Rs.1,70,000/- from the ATM Machine and therefore based on the suspicion accused persons including applicant were interrogated and Page No.2 on the basis of memorandum statement applicant was arrested on 11.8.2023.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. After investigation, police submitted charge-sheet. In the entire charge-sheet, accept the CCTV footage that the applicant was found withdrawing the amount from the ATM Machine there is no other material to suggest that it is applicant who in any manner has tempered the ATM Machine, neither it is a case of prosecution that the ATM card used and seized from the possession of the applicant is forged and fabricated in any manner. Applicant is in jail since 20.07.2023. The offence is triable by JMFC and trial will take some time. There is no other criminal antecedents against the applicant.
4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by counsel for applicant and submits that the applicant has committed serious offence. He by tempering the ATM Machine has withdrawn 3,48,500/- in excess. He was traced with the help of footage of the CCTV Camera installed in the ATM Centre. During search, police seized 9 ATM cards of different banks from the possession of the applicant along with cash of Rs.2,900/-
5. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, period of detention of the applicant and, further, considering that the case to be triable by JMFC and material collected by the police during course of investigation, without commenting anything on merits of case, I feel inclined to allow this bail application and release the applicants on bail.
Page No.3
7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed and it is directed that applicants shall be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned on the conditions that; • he shall appear before the trial Court concerned regularly on each & every date unless exempted from appearance. • he shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses. • If applicant is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Nisha