Govind Prasad Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court 8 Aug 2022 Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 6964 Of 2022 (2022) 08 CHH CK 0006
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 6964 Of 2022

Hon'ble Bench

Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J

Advocates

Anurag Verma, Ajay Kumrani

Final Decision

Allowed

Acts Referred
  • Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 34, 420, 467, 468, 471

Judgement Text

Translate:

1. This second application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail has been filed by the accused/applicant who has been arrested on 30.03.2022 in

connection with Crime No.58/2022 registered at Police Station Thelkadih, Rajnandgaon for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471

& 34 of IPC.

2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant Tilak Verma filed a written complaint before the police station alleging that he purchased the land

bearing Khasra No.68/3 from one Chetan Verma (co-accused) to the consideration of Rs.6,80,000/-. But when he went to took possession for the

said land, he found that there is no land of Khasra No.68/3. Therefore, the present applicant, Chetan Verma and concerning Patwari namely Maniram

being involved in the aforesaid crime by preparing the forged and fabricated documents and cheated the complaint, have been arrested.

It is pertinent to mention here that the first bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file the same at an

appropriate stage vide order dated 23.06.2022 in MCRC No.4215/2022.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused/applicant is innocent and has been roped in a false case. He would submit that the co-

accused Maniram has been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 27.07.2022 in MCRC No.4860/2022. He would further submit

that entire consideration amount has been refunded to the complainant Tilak Verma and he has also filed copy of agreement and bank statements in

support of his contention. He submits that considering that the complainant has himself made entered into a compromise that on behest of the present

applicant, other accused persons have refunded the consideration amount and also considering that the co-accused Maniram has been enlarged on

bail, the present applicant may also be benefited by granting regular bail.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.

5. Having heard the parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, further considering that co-accused Maniram has been enlarged on

bail; the complainant has entered into a compromise with regard to return of amount; and that the applicant is behind the bars since 30.03.2022, I deem

it appropriate to release the applicant on bail.

6. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that on applicant’s furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety

for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial,

(b) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of case,

(c) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More