SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
SAROJ SHRIVAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
MCRCA 1546/2022



Advocates:
['ABHISHEK SARAF', '', 'ISHWAR JAISWAL', 'AKHTAR HUSSAIN', 'Ramsajiwan', 'A G']

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

MCRCA No. 1322 of 2022

Ravindra Mankar S/o Maruti Mankar, aged about 41 years, R/o Ward

No. 01, Rajeev Nagar, Kotra Road, Near Milk Dairy and House of

Narayan Patel, Raigarh, Tahsil and District Raigarh, CG

--- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station

Chakradhar Nagar, District - Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent

MCRCA No. 1546 of 2022

Saroj Shrivas S/o ShriChamruram Shrivas, aged about 36 years,

Occupation – Operator MSP Steel and Power Limited Jamgon,

Raigarh, R/o Village – Chhuhipali, Police Station – Outpost Jutemill,

Tahsil and District Raigarh, CG (wrongly mentioned as Chamru Hirwa

in order)

--- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station

Chakradhar Nagar, District - Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

---Respondent

For Applicants

-

Shri Hari Agrawal and Shri Abhishek

Saraf, Advocates

For State

-

Shri B.P. Banjare, Dy. GA

Order on Board by Hon'ble Shri Justice

Sachin Singh Rajput

01

/12/2022

Since both these applications pertain to same Crime No.

435/2022 registered at PS Chakradhar Nagar, District – Raigarh, CG, they

are being disposed of by this common order.

2.

These applications under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure have been fled by the applicants who are apprehending

their arrest in connection with the aforesaid Crime Number for the

offence punishable under Sections 40,, 408, 34 PPC.

3.

Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 18.8.2022, the

complainant made a written report to the effect that he is working on

the post of Security Manager in the MSP Steel Plant/Factory and for the

purpose of the said plant coal was purchased from Kusmunda Mines

which was tranported through one Akash Singh Transport, Korba. Pt is

alleged that on 9.8.2022 the coal was loaded from Kusmunda Mines

and was transported to MSP Factory by three trucks which reached the

premises of the Factory in the intervening night of 10.8.2022 and

11.8.2022. Thereafter, in the morning of 11.8.2022 at about 8 AM the

trucks were weighed in the MSP Factory and then left the premises to

unload at the coal washry where on weighment it was found by the

Supervisor that the coal loaded in the truck was found less than what

was mentioned in the weighment slip. Upon oral inquiry from the

drivers of the trucks, the Supervisor came to know that the truck

drivers had an arrangerment with the weighment Bridge Operator and

they sold half of the coal on the way and thereby misappropriated the

coal amounting to Rs. 4 lakhs.

4.

Counsel for the applicants submits that the three trucks loaded

with the coal had started from Kusmunda Mines on 9.8.2022 and

reached the weighing bridge of MSP Factory in the intervening night of

10.8.2022 and 11.8.2022 where both the applicants are working. They

submit that the weighment of the trucks was done in the automatic

machine which cannot be manipulated, and the coputerised receipts

showing the weight thereof were generated. Thereafter, the trucks are

stated to have gone to the coal washry and on reaching there again

the weighment was done on 12.8.2022 where the coal was found less

by 4, tonnes, and on that basis, it is alleged that the applicants have

misappropriated the said huge quantity of coal. They submit that the

applicants are innocent and have not committed any crime as alleged,

and the possibility that during transit before the trucks reached the

coal washry, misappropriation of the said coal could have been done

by some third person, cannot be ruled out. Counsel for the applicant in

MCRCA No. 1456/2022 submits an enquiry was conducted against the

applicant where it has been revealed that on that particular day he

was not in the weighing bridge.

5.

On the other hand, State counsel opposes the applications for

anticipatory bail and submits that looking to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top