Sanjay Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 1524 OF 2016 Sanjay Kumar Sahu S/o Girwar Ram Sahu aged about 24 years R/o Sahu Hotel Ram Nagar Ward-14 P.S. Supela Bhilai Tehsil and District Durg C.G.

---Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Supela District Durg C.G.

---Non-applicant And M.Cr.C. No. 1584 OF 2016 Narrottam Netam S/o Shri Gokul Netam aged about 27 years R/o Saraswati Chowk Ramnagar Muktidham Chowki Vaishalinagar P.S. Supela District Durg C.G. ---Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate District Durg C.G.

---Non-applicant For Applicants : Shri P.R. Patankar and Shri A.C.

Sahu, Advocates For Non-applicant : Shri Ajit Singh, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 17/03/2016 1.

Above mentioned two bail applications arise out of a common Crime No. 898/2015, registered at Police Station Supela, Distt. Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 436, 294, 506, 323/34 of the I.P.C., therefore, they are being heard analogously and decided by this common order. All the two are first bail applications filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. 2.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 28/10/2015, applicants abused the complainant and also threatened him to kill and caused damage to curtain and other household articles of complainant and thereby committed aforesaid offence.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that applicants have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in the offence in question. He would further submit that no custodial interrogation is required. He would lastly submit that charge sheet has

been filed and applicants are in jail since 20/01/2016 & 05/01/2016 respectively, therefore, they may be released on bail.

4.

Learned counsel for the State would oppose the prayer for grant of bail.

5.

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

6.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and further taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence, role of the applicants; pretrial detention of the applicants and charge sheet has already been filed, this Court is of the opinion that present is the fit case, in which, the applicants should be enlarged on regular bail.

7.

Accordingly, the bail applications (M.Cr.C. Nos. 1524/2016 & 1584/2016) filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are allowed.

8.

It is directed that applicants namely, Sanjay Kumar Sahu and Narrottam Netam shall 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 trial Court for their appearance as and when directed.

9.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE Tiwari