Sukhnandan Rahtore And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 291 of 2019

1. Sukhnandan Rahtore S/o Samelal Rathore Aged About 27 Years Caste Rathore

2. Sanjay Rathore S/o Kaleshwar Rathore Aged About 19 Years Both R/o Village Dhaneli, Police Station Pamgarh, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Navagarh, DistrictJanjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent MCRC No. 602 of 2019 Anil Kumar @ Channu S/o Jeevan Lal Rathaur Aged About 21 Years Caste - Rathaur, R/o Village - Dhaneli, Police Station - Pamgarh, District - Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Nawagarh, District - Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For applicants in MCRC No. 291/2019 Mr. Sumit Singh, Adv.

For applicant in MCRC No. 602/2019 Mr. Sumit Jhanwar, Adv.

For non-applicant/State Mr. Vinod Tekam, PL.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board 31-11. As both the above bail applications arise out of the same crime number of the same police station, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. These are first bail applications under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the applicants before this Court and their no bail application is pending before any other court.

3. The applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 179/2018 registered in police station Navagarh, Distt. Janjgir, Champa, (CG) for offence punishable under Section 394, 34, IPC.

4. Prosecution story in brief is that on 6-10-2018 at about 10.30 pm at village Dhaneli, 3 unknown persons stopped the motorcycle of complainant Ravindralal Kashyap who was along with his brother in

relation Krishna Kumar. One unknown person looted Rs. 10,000/- and one golden locket from Ravindralal and one golden locket from Krishna Kumar. Those unknown persons also beat the complainant and Krishna Kumar. At some distance, applicant Anil Kumar @ Channu was caught. In TI parade, complainant Ravindralal identified applicants Sukhnandan and Sanjay Rathor.

5. Counsel for the applicants argued that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated hence they be released on bail.

6. On the other hand, the State Counsel opposed the bail application. He further submits that no criminal antecedent has been reported against applicants in the police case diary.

7. Looking to the above facts and circumstances of the case, the applications are allowed. It is ordered that if each of the applicants furnishes two solvent sureties each for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- along with one personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned with the condition that they will not involve themselves in such type of offence in future, they be released on bail.

8. CC as per rules.

Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) Judge Pathak