Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 58624 (CHH)

SMT. POONAMRANI DEVDAS v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRCA/1823/2025 · 2025-11-18

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:56393 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1823 of 2025 Smt. Poonamrani Devdas W/o Mujjamil Ahmed Aged About 37 Years Profession (Revenue Inspector) Revenue Inspector Circle Sardi, Tehsil Baikunthpur District- Koriya, (C.G.) R/o Chhinddand Tehsil Baikunthpur, District- Koriya (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Charcha, District- Koriya (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Swajeet Singh Ubeja, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.11.2025 1. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant, who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 160/2025 registered at Police Station – Charcha, District- Koriya (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120B of Indian Penal Code. 2. According to the case diary, complainant Girja Devi entered into an agreement with accused Shamim Khan to purchase 5 decimals of land from Khasra No. 67 for a price of Rs.150,000. Later, the accused informed the complainant that a case was pending regarding Khasra No. PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2025.11.20 12:46:10 +0530 2 67 and offered instead to sell 5 decimals of land from Khasra No. 736/01. The complainant registered the land sale through token No. 5 at the registry office on 9 May 2022. In exchange for the purchase, the complainant paid Rs.1,25,000 as an advance through Ravish Gupta and Rs.6,20,000 before the registration through Ravi Gupta, thereby paying a total of Rs.7,70,000. When the complainant requested the registry documents from the accused, Shamim Khan, they were provided only after a year. Upon showing the registry documents to the Patwari, the Patwari declared them to be fraudulent. Hence, this offence. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the applicant is a Revenue Inspector, and that one Samin Khan had prepared the forged sale deed and also annexed forged revenue records, including the boundary details of the land. The applicant’s signature was also forged, for which he lodged a complaint at the concerned police station on 28.07.2025 against Samim Khan, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure A/4. Furthermore, the Patwari, namely, Bhanuti Paikara, who was also involved in the present case, has been allowed bail by the trial Court; a copy of that order has been annexed as Annexure A/3. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. Therefore, he prays for the grant of bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation leveled against the applicant and the fact that the applicant is 3 a Revenue Inspector, and that one Samin Khan had prepared the forged sale deed and also annexed forged revenue records, including the boundary details of the land, further the applicant’s signature was also forged, for which he lodged a complaint at the concerned police station on 28.07.2025 against Samim Khan, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure A/4, furthermore, the Patwari, namely, Bhanuti Paikara, who was also involved in the present case, has been allowed bail by the trial Court; a copy of that order has been annexed as Annexure A/3, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, hence, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRCA is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant - Smt. Poonamrani Devdas on executing a personal bond with one local surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting Officer, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) The applicant 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) The applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (c) The applicant 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 their adhaar card alongwith a colored postcard full size photo having printed the adhaar number on it, which shall be verified by the trial Court. (e)The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Preeti