Chattisgarh High Court
Kalaram @ Ramdas vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 1 November, 2023
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
Neutral Citation
2023:CGHC:26476-DB 1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 1115 of 2023
Kalaram @ Ramdas S/o Kriparam Nayak Aged About 33 Years R/o
Jaitpur, Police Station Sarsiwa, District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Station
Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
(Cause-tile taken from the Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Mr. Pawan Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 01.11.2023
1. The appellant has preferred this second bail application under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (for short, the Act of 2008) for grant of bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.377/2023, registered at Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 489 (d) ([k) (x) (?k) of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the IPC).
Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:26476-DB 2
2. The prosecution story in brief, is that prior to 28.07.2020 at Village Jaitpur of P.S. Sarsiwa, District Balodabazar, the appellant along with other co-accused persons were engaged in printing the currency notes through colour photocopy machine, computer set, cutter and the other accessories. On 28.07.2020, the petitioner was in possession of total 2591 numbers valued at Rs. 13,00,000/- forged currency notes kept with him for intending to use the same as original notes.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is also submitted that only on the basis of memorandum statement of the witnesses namely Ashok Sahu and Rahul Kumar the present appellant has been implicated in the crime in question but they have turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that that the appellant is in jail since 28.07.2020 and trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail.
4. Earlier the appellant and other co-accused persons have filed their first bail application bearing CRA No. 749 of 2020 and others connected matter before the Court and the said bail application (CRA No.1009 of 2020) of the present appellant was rejected vide order dated 15.06.2021.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the appellant is not only involved in the alleged commission of offence of counterfeiting currency notes, but Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:26476-DB 3 also possessed the same. He also submits that from the possession of the present appellant, huge number of counterfeit currency notes being five number of fake currency notes of Rs. 500/- denomination and 45 number of fake currency notes of Rs. 100/- denomination were seized and on the basis of his memorandum statement his house was raided, material used for counterfeiting currency notes, which included Computer, Printer, Bond Paper etc. were seized and from his house also, 30 numbers of fake currency notes of Rs. 500/- denomination and 50 numbers of fake currency notes of Rs. 100/- denomination were seized, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material available on record.
7. Considering the fact that number of counterfeit currencies recovered to the tune of 13,00,000/- forged currency notes from the possession of the appellant and from the house of the present appellant, materials which are ordinarily used for counterfeiting currency notes, have also been seized,therefore, it cannot be said that this is a case of false implication. Accordingly, we are not inclined to allow the second bail application of appellant- Kalaram @ Ramdas involved in Crime No.377/2023, registered at Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 489 (d) ([k) (x) (?k) of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the IPC), is rejected.
8. However, considering the submission of learned counsel for the Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:26476-DB 4 appellant that out of total prosecution witnesses, only seven witnesses have to be examined, therefore, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
9. The Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh is directed to ensure that the said seven witness in which some of the witnesses are police officials are present on the date fixed by the trial Court for recording of their evidence.
10. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned as well as Director General of Police, Chhattisgarh for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
amita