MCRCA/1445/2022 of SHANTILATA YADAV Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 31 December 2022

1. Shantilata Yadav D/o Santosh Aged About 35 Years Occupation PhadPrabhari Aadim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Rajpur, R/o Vill. Kerabahar,Jhagarpur P.S. And Tehsil Lailunga, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh Prabhari Aadim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Rajpur, R/o Vill. Kerabahar,Jhagarpur P.S. And Tehsil Lailunga, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

2. Trilochan Behara S/o Parmanand Behara Aged About 52 YearsOccupation Sahayak Prabandhak Aadim Jati Sewa Sahkari SamitiRajpur, R/o Vill. Khar Post Keshla, P.S. And Tehsil Lailunga, District :Raigarh, Chhattisgarh Occupation Sahayak Prabandhak Aadim Jati Sewa Sahkari SamitiRajpur, R/o Vill. Khar Post Keshla, P.S. And Tehsil Lailunga, District :Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer PoliceLailunga, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer PoliceLailunga, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

---- Non-Applicant

For Applicant: Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Shri BP Banjare, Deputy GA.

Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J

Order On Board

31/12/2022

1. The applicants have preferred this application for grant of anticipatorybail as they apprehend their arrest in connection with CrimeNo.266/2022, registered at Police Station Lailunga, District Raigarh foroffence punishable under Section 420, 409, 34 of the IPC.bail as they apprehend their arrest in connection with CrimeNo.266/2022, registered at Police Station Lailunga, District Raigarh foroffence punishable under Section 420, 409, 34 of the IPC.

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicants submits that he is notpressing the present bail application in respect of applicant No.1pressing the present bail application in respect of applicant No.1

Shantilata Yadav, as the applicant has already been arrested.

3. It is accordingly dismissed as not pressed.

4. Prosecution case is that in the year 2021-22, the present applicant alongwith other co-accused namely, Shantilata Yadav and Computer OperatorRudresh Kumar Sao have not complied with the paddy procurementpolicy and extended the Rakba of the cultivators and thereby causedloss to the exchequer. On the basis of enquiry report conducted by theCommittee, offence under Sections 420, 409, 34 of the IPC has beenregistered.with other co-accused namely, Shantilata Yadav and Computer OperatorRudresh Kumar Sao have not complied with the paddy procurementpolicy and extended the Rakba of the cultivators and thereby causedloss to the exchequer. On the basis of enquiry report conducted by theCommittee, offence under Sections 420, 409, 34 of the IPC has beenregistered.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the presentapplicant was not involved in the said crime and in the enquiry reportalso, he has not been named and no irregularity has been committed byhim. Computer Operator namely, Rudresh Kumar Sao was heldresponsible for the said purchase of the paddy. Therefore, the applicantmay be released on anticipatory bail. applicant was not involved in the said crime and in the enquiry reportalso, he has not been named and no irregularity has been committed byhim. Computer Operator namely, Rudresh Kumar Sao was heldresponsible for the said purchase of the paddy. Therefore, the applicantmay be released on anticipatory bail.

6. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would oppose the prayer forgrant of anticipatory bail. However, he fairly submits that in theenquiry report submitted by the Committee, the name of the presentapplicant is not mentioned. grant of anticipatory bail. However, he fairly submits that in theenquiry report submitted by the Committee, the name of the presentapplicant is not mentioned.

7. Having considered the submissions, particularly considering the natureof accusations, without further commenting anything on the merits ofthe case, this Court is inclined to release the applicant No.2 – TrilochanBehera on anticipatory bail.of accusations, without further commenting anything on the merits ofthe case, this Court is inclined to release the applicant No.2 – TrilochanBehera on anticipatory bail.

8. Accordingly, the application in respect of applicant No.2 – TrilochanBehara is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of theapplicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his executing apersonal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sumto the satisfaction of the arresting officer with the following conditions:-Behara is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of theapplicant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his executing apersonal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sumto the satisfaction of the arresting officer with the following conditions:-

(i) he shall not influence the witnesses during trial.

(ii) he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officeras and when required;

(iii) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat orpromise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as todissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any policeofficer.

CC today.

Sd/-

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari)

Vacation Judge