Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24003 (CHH)

MOHIT RAM NETAM v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRCA/777/2025 · 2025-05-26

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:22377 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 777 of 2025 1 - Mohit Ram Netam S/o Ajit Ram Netam Aged About 60 Years (As Per Applicant Information) R/o Jailpata Road Near Mangal Bhavan, Surajpur, Distt. Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Surajpur, Distt. Surajpur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant (Cause Title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. B. P. Soni, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27/05/2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of BNSS / 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, ‘Cr.P.C.’) has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 235 of 2025 registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.05.28 16:25:12 +0530 2 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant Murli Manohar has lodged written report against the applicant that being convinced repeatedly by the applicant, he went to Mohit Netam and Hemant Netam's house along with Rajendra Sonwani, Khilanand Thakur and Pushpendra Kushwaha and given Rs.5 lakhs in cash on 12.11.2022 and after few days on 01.02.2023 again given Rs.2 Lakhs through cheque, thereafter, he suspected that he has been trapped in a fraud, he demanded the money from Hemant Netam who is represented as a guarantee then Hemant Netam has given him a cheque of Rs.7 lakhs bearing number 511061 of his account in State Bank of India, thereafter when the complainant name is not appeared in the selection list of Sub Inspector, he has made communication through mobile to the Hemant Netam and Mohit Netam then they told him that the complainant whould not worry because he would get selection in the post of Constable but this time the complainant said that now he does not want the job and requested to return his money upon which in the month of October 2024 Hemant Netam has returned Rs.50,000/- to the complainant and assured that rest of the money will be given after few days but later Hemant Netam has not returned the rest of the money to the complainant thereafter police has registered the case against the present applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the IPC. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. His son has taken the alleged amount from the complainant and he is posted in PHE Department. He further submits that in the month of October, 2024, a sum of Rs.50,000/- was returned to the complainant and assured to return the rest of the amount within a short period. Therefore, he prays to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. He further submits that the applicant’s 3 son has taken advantage of his father’s position and taken bribe of huge amount by cheque and also returned some amount on the part of failure for providing a job of Sub Inspector and adversely kept the money for his own use with malafide motive. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, allegations levelled against the applicant, further there is money transaction by cheque for providing government job, thus, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the applicant-Mohit Ram Netam, under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in Crime No. 235 of 2025 registered at Police Station – Surajpur, District Surajpur (C.G.) for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), is rejected. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Ravi Mandavi