High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/5910/2017rejected

Gajendra Kumar Sonwani @ Sonu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-11-21Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5910 of 2017 • Gajendra Kumar Sonwani @ Sonu S/o Shashi Bhushan Sonwani, Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Kalmitar, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant.

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For applicant :

Mr. N.K. Chatterjee, Advocate.

For respondent/State.

Mr. Luv Sharma, Panel Lawyer ( Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma) Oral order (Passed on 21-11-2017)

1. The applicant has preferred this application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail, who has been arrested on 58-2017 in connection with Crime No. 238 of 2017 registered at Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 380 of the IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that there was theft in the intervening night of 4/5-8-2017 in the house of the complainant Sanju Jaiswal wherein one TV and cash were stolen and on the basis of memorandum statement of the applicant, articles were seized from him and thereby he committed the aforesaid offence.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in custody since 5-8-2017, therefore he may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposing the prayer for grant of bail submits that three cases of theft and robbery were pending against the applicant prior to present charge, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

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

6. Looking to the material collected by the prosecution and further looking to the fact that apart from the present case, three cases of theft and robbery are pending against him, this court is of the view that it is not a fit case where the applicant can be released on bail.

7. Accordingly, the application of the applicant for grant of bail is rejected.

Sd/- (Ram Prasanna Sharma) Judge Raju