1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

MCRC No. 5333 of 2022

• Suresh Mishra @ Babbu Mishra S/o G.P. Mishra Aged About 56

Years R/o Vilalge Near Holy Nursery School, Rajkishore Nagar,

P.S. Sarkanda Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sarkanda, Bilaspur District

Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent

AND

MCRC No. 5218 of 2022

• Suresh Mishra @ Babbu Mishra S/o G.P. Mishra Aged About 56

Years R/o Village Near Holy Nursery School, Rajkishore Nagar,

Thana Sarkanda Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Sarkanda, Bilaspur District

Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent

For Applicant

:

Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate

For Respondent

:

Mr. B.P. Banjare, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey

Order on Board

25/07/2022

1.

Since, in both the bail applications, the applicant is one and

same, they are being decided by this common order.

2.

The applicant has preferred these 昀椀rst bail applications

under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant

of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime

No.250/2022 in MCRC No.5333/2022 and Crime No.251/2022

in MCRC No.5218/2022 registered at Police Station –

Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o昀昀ence

2

punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with

section 120-B, 193 of IPC.

3.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that a written report was

lodged by Sandip Thakur, Tahsildar, stating therein that

Bhonduram had 昀椀led an application under Section 115, 116

of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code for

correction/addition of his name in the land bearing Kh.

No.224/3, 232/12 are 4.95 and 1 acre situated at village

Chilhati, which was purchased from Gulal through registered

sale deed on 01.05.1976 and till 1984-85 the name of co-

accused Bhonduram has been continued in the revenue

record, but after 1985 the name of Bhonduram was omitted

from the revenue record. After inquiry, on 20.10.2016, the

Tahsildar has passed the order in an application 昀椀led under

Section 115, 116 of C.G.L.R.C. by correcting the revenue

record in the name of Bhonduram and the same was

mutated. But in the year 2022, the FIR has been registered

against co-accused Bhonduram and other co-accused

alleging that co-accused Bhonduram in connivance with the

present applicant prepared forged document and has shown

the forge document as real document and used the

documents for mutation process. Based on this, o昀昀ence has

been registered against the applicant and he has been taken

into custody on 30.03.2022.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant

is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in

question. He further submits that on the basis of

3

memorandum statement of co-accused, the present

applicant has been arrested and only allegation against the

present applicant is that he appeared as witness in the said

proceeding. He also submits that there is no evidence on

record that the sale deed is forged one. He also submits that

in an identical matter, vide order dated 25.01.2022 and

14.07.2022 passed in MCRC No.9915/2021 and 2332/2022

respectively, the applicant has been granted bail by this

Court. It is next submitted that the applicant is in custody

since 30.03.2022, charge sheet has been 昀椀led, there is no

likelihood of his case being decided in near future, therefore,

considering nature of o昀昀ence and detention period, he may

be granted bail.

5.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the

bail application.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

case diary.

7.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature

of o昀昀ence, allegation against the present applicant and

further considering the fact that vide order dated 25.01.2022

and