Rajendra And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No.5515 of 2017
1. Rajendra S/o Shri Bhikham Tandan, Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Kokobani, Thana Pipariya, Civil & Revenue District Kabeerdham, Chhattisgarh.
2. Neeraj S/o Shri Shyamlal Tandan, Aged About 23 Years Caste Gada, R/o Village Kokobani, Thana Pipariya, Civil & Revenue District Kabeerdham, Chhattisgarh.
3. Mahesh S/o Maniram Yadav, Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Rajpalpur, Police Outpost Chilfi, Thana & Tahsil Lormi, Civil & Revenue District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.
4. Ravi S/o Shri Rajendra Goswami, Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Pondi, Thana Bodla, Civil & Revenue District Kabeerdham, Chhattisgarh.
5. Abdul S/o Shri Bad Ali Jabbar, Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Changotola, Police Station Changotola, Civil & Revenue District Balaghat, Madhya Pradesh
6. Niyam Ahmed S/o Shri Riyad Ahmed, Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Changotola, Police Station Changotola, Civil & Revenue District Balaghat, Madhya Pradesh
7. Chandrika Prasad Dhritlahre, S/o Chandraprakash Dhritlahre, Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Baiharsari, Police Outpost Fasterpur, Thana & Tahsil Mungeli, Civil & Revenue District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.
8. Rakesh S/o Shri Phool Singh Yadav, Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Mohgaon, Thana Malajkhand, Civil & Revenue District Balaghat, Madhya Pradesh.
---- Petitioners
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Outpost Fasterpur, Police Station City Kotwali Mungeli, Civil & Revenue District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent For Petitioner :
Shri Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/State :
Ms. Sunita Jain, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 23/11/2017 Heard.
2.
The applicants have moved this application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.434/2017 registered at Police Station
Outpost Fasterpur, Thana City Kotwali Mungeli for the offence punishable under Section 4, 6 & 10 of the CG Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act 2004 and Section 11(1)(d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960. 3.
Case of the prosecution is that the applicants were found transporting the agricultural cattle for being taken to Slaughter house. 4.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated and he was not involved in such commission of offence. He further submits that the investigation is complete and charge sheet has been filed and that the applicants are not likely to abscond or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. 5.
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for grant of bail on the submission that the applicants are involved in the illegal trafficking of agricultural cattle for being taken to slaughter house, therefore, prima facie case is made out against them. He next submitted that the applicant No.7 was earlier arrested in connection with the similar offence.
6.
Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the parties, particularly taking into consideration the nature of allegation and the maximum sentence, which could be awarded under the alleged offence and the fact that the investigation is complete, charge sheet has been filed and that the applicants are not likely to abscond or tamper with the prosecution witnesses, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
7.
Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is ordered that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- along with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court on the condition that they shall appear before the trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted.
SD/- ( Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Tumane