High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 03 CHH CK 0202

RAMESH KUMAR BHARAT vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 21 March 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
GOUTAM BHADURI
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
MCRC No. 6625 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 467 words
1.

This is the First Bail Application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been

arrested on 21.07.2017 in connection with Crime No.372/2014 registered at Police Station Civil Line, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for the offence

punishable under Sections 420 & 409 of the I.P.C. and Section 45 (2) of the Chhattisgarh Value Added Tax, 2005.

2.

As per the prosecution case, a case was registered under Sections 420 & 409 of the I.P.C. and Section 45 (2) of the Chhattisgarh Value Added

Tax, 2005 on the ground that the applicant had opened a shop namely M/s. Ramesh Trading Company and sold different commodities i.e. paddy, rice

and oil at Rs.7 Crores, however, did not pay the tax amount of Rs.34,19000/- as such the offence was committed and he was arrested.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated and he was employed with the

Ramesh Trading Company, wherein he was shown to be the owner. He would further submit that he is the holder of card of Below Poverty Line and

his son is also disabled and he is in jail since 21.07.2017 and no further investigation is necessary in this case, therefore, the applicant may be released

on bail.

4.

On the earlier occasion learned State counsel was directed to verify the fact that whether the applicant is the holder of BPL card or not. State

counsel submits that the applicant was issued a ration card of below poverty line from the Municipal Corporation.

5.

Considering the nature of allegations and the report of the State, wherein the applicant has been stated to be a BPL card holder and it appears that

the business was being carried in his name and also taking into the period of detention, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

6.

Accordingly, the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/-

with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the

said Court.

7.

It is further observed that the applicant shall be at liberty to stake his claim over the business for which he has been projected as the owner, as

rights and liabilities would be the equal responsibility of the applicant.

Further considering the nature of allegations and facts as appears the applicant is downtrodden as such the District Legal Aid Authority may provide

the legal aid to the applicant to make him aware of his rights & liabilities qua the nature of allegations of him.