Abhishek Pandey And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 132 of 2021
1. Abhishek Pandey, S/o Chandrika Prasad, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Dullapur, Police Station Pipariya, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.
2. Arvind Verma, S/o Jay Prakash Verma, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Kusumghata, Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh,
3. Ramakant Chandravanshi, S/o Ramji Chandravanshi, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Chhanta, Police Station Pipariya, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh,
4. Kuldeep Chandravanshi, S/o Kamlesh Chandravanshi, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Neurgaon Khurd, Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh,
5. Yagyadatt Verma, S/o Late Prakash Verma, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village Baiharsari, Police Station Bodla, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh,
6. Sachin Gupta, S/o Heeralal Gupta, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Near Mahamaya Mandir, Pandatarai, Police Station Pandatarai, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh, ---- Applicants
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, G.A. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 21.06.2021
1. Heard.
2. This application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicants who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.
727/2020 registered at Police Station- Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for commission of the offence punishable under Sections 147, 447, 452 of IPC.
3. Case of the prosecution is that, it has been alleged that present applicants entered the Congress Bhawan, Kawardha and recite objectionable words against the members of the ruling party. Based on this, offence was registered against the present applicants.
4. Learned counsels for the applicants submit that the present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that there is false allegation against the applicants, therefore, the present applicants may be granted anticipatory bail.
5. On the other hand, counsel for the State however opposes the application for anticipatory bail.
6. After hearing counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants in connection with aforesaid crime number, they shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one local surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned arresting/ investigating officer or the Court concerned, as the case may be, with the following terms and conditions: (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation before the concerned investigating officer as and when required.
(ii) that the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts or the case as to dissuade him/her from
disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that the applicants shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Ruchi