← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRCA/1111/2017rejected

Neelkanth Baghmar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-03-09Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1111 of 2017 Neelkanth Baghmar S/o Late Bhuvneshwar Baghmar, Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Khapradih, Presently Residing At Gandhi Mandir Ward N, Civil Line Bhatapara, Police Station Suhela, Tahsil Simga, District Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Suhela, District Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh , Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Mr. M.K. Bhaduri, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Mr. Manish Nigam, PL For Objector :

Mr. R. K. Bhagat, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 09/03/2018 Heard.

1.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.137/2017 registered at police station - Suehla, Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence under Section 408, 403 r/w Section 34 of IPC.

2.

Case of the prosecution is that the stock of urea was found short in the godown of the society engaged for distribution under public distribution system. The allegation against the applicant is that he was the member of the society and he, along with the store keeper removed urea for use in this own cultivating area and distributed to others.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the allegations, as per FIR are against the Store incharge and applicant has been falsely implicated in this case.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes prayer and submits that more than one villagers have stated during the investigation that at the instance of present applicant the urea was removed from the stock from time to time.

5.

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that co-accused Dhanjaram Sahu is granted regular bail on depositing the entire amount. 6.

In view of the above, in case,the applicant surrenders and applies for regular bail, that should be decided as far as possible within three days. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Rohit