Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43352 (CHH)

ROHIT KUMAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRCA/1431/2025 · 2025-09-15

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:47500 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1431 of 2025 • Rohit Kumar S/o Late Jaiprakash Paraste Aged About 44 Years R/o Village - Lohari, Ps And Tahsil - Marwahi, Distt. Gpm Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Marwahi, Distt. Gourella-Pendra-Marwahi Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Ram Avtar Mishra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Hari Om Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/09/2025 1. This first anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.126/2025, registered at Police Station – Marwahi, District – GPM (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that complainant Sanjay Kumar Rai made a written complaint to the effect that on 23.03.2024 the applicant having executed an agreement for sale of vehicle Scorpio bearing registration No.CG 07 NA 1111 and having over the vehicle with some documents relating to finance, obtained Rs.81,000/- from him. As per the agreement, the finance agent Devkumar and applicant agreed to give NOC fo transfer of the vehicle from the VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.09.17 18:00:22 +0530 2 finance company to the complainant. However, when the complainant asked for such NOC, the applicant obtained Rs.4,000/- from him and even thereafter despite several requests for NOC, he did not give the same. For the last few months, the applicant has been saying that he is not getting NOC and therefore, would return the amount but neither he transferred the vehicle in his name by giving NOC nor did return the amount obtained from him, In this way, the applicant has committed cheating with the complainant. Based on this aforesaid offences has been registered. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He submits that applicant gave Rs.30,000/- to the Shriram Finance Company and then after obtaining NOC from the finance company he would transfer the vehicle in the name of the complainant, but the complainant did not agree to it and lodged a false report against the applicant. He also submits that the present applicant has four previous criminal antecedents, investigation and trial may take some time for its conclusion therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel for the non-applicant/State, opposed the anticipatory bail application of the present applicant and submits that applicant has four criminal criminal antecedents registered at Police Station Marwahi vide Crime No.45 of 2004 for the offence under Sections 363, 366 of IPC and in crime No.86 of 2005 for the offence under Sections 294, 323, 506B of IPC, in crime No.86 of 2005 for the offence under Sections 294, 323, 506-B of IPC and in Crime No.66 of 2010 for the offence under Sections 342, 294, 506 of IPC and Crime No.66 of 2014 for the 3 offenece under Sections342, 294, 506 and 323 of IPC, it appears that applicant is a habitual offender, therefore applicant is not entitle for grant of anticipatory bail application . 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for the parties, allegation levelled against the present applicant and also considering the fact that investigation and trial may take some time for its conclusion, therefore, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant – Rohit Kumar on executing a personal bond and one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. (b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. (d) The applicant and the surety shall submit a copy of his adhaar card along with a coloured postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e) he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali