Ashok Kumar Sharma And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Misc. Criminal Case No.664 of 2016

1. Ashok Kumar Sharma, S/o Mangal Prasad Sharma, aged about 48 years, R/o M.I.G.-II/184, Borsi, Durg, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.)

2. Harinarayan Nishad, S/o Gourilal Nishad, aged about 28 years, R/o Labour Colony, Near Durga Mandir, Khursipar, Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) ---- Applicants

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Station House Officer, Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicants:

Dr. N.K. Shukla, Senior Advocate with Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate.

For Non-applicant:

Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Wankhede, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 01/03/2016

1. The accused/applicants have moved this bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.449/2015, registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, Distt. Durg, for the offence punishable under Sections 395, 365, 294 and 323 of the IPC.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21-10-2015 at 11.45 p.m. the present applicants kidnapped Jitendra Singh and Banti and also looted the motorcycle owned by Jitendra Singh and also abused him and caused simple injuries.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicants have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in the case. In fact, the applicants own Apna

Cable Network Pvt. Ltd. whereas the complainants own Asian Cables, there is altercation between two groups pursuant to which one Harinarayan Nishad has lodged FIR under Crime No.450/2015 at Police Station Mohan Nagar, Durg, against Banti Khandelwal, Jairam Nagpure, Jitendra Singh, Daya Pandey and S. Baji for the offence punishable under Section 379 read with Section 34 of the IPC in which they have been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 21-1-2016 passed in M.Cr.C.(A)No.1248/2015. The applicants have not looted any article, the motorcycle has been seized from the police station and on account of group rivalry the applicants have been roped in the case, as the complainants have unauthorizedly cut the cables owned by the applicants in order to dispute the cable network services and to damage the applicants commercially. The applicants are in jail since 22-10-2015. Charge-sheet has been filed and no custodial interrogation of the applicants is required, therefore, the applicants deserve to be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the application.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence, facts and circumstances of the case, role of the present applicants, the motorcycle which is said to have been lotted was seized at the police station, pretrial detention of the applicants, charge-sheet has been filed and counter case has been registered against the complainants in which they have been granted anticipatory bail, I am of the view that it is a fit case to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

7. It is, therefore, directed that the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for their appearance as and when directed.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma