High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRCA/284/2016rejected

Surendra @ Bholu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-03-22Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 284 of 2016 • Surendra @ Bholu S/o Hemdas Navrang Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Parsakanpa, Post Office - Kanteli, Police Station - Lalpur, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Lalpur, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh Respondent For the applicant :

Mr. Aman Kesarwani, Advocate.

For the Respondent :

Mr. Anupam Dubey, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 22.03.2016

1. Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 202 of 2015 registered at Police Station Lalpur, District Mungeli (C.G) for the offences punishable under section 489(B)/34 IPC, , the applicant has filed this application u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail.

2. As per the prosecution case, on 24.11.2015 on an information received that at village Keshatarpur Nawapara the applicant and other co-accused are circulating the fake currency notes, the area was raided by the police and during such raid two persons namely Gautar Patre and Ramkhilawan Tandon were caught hold and from their possession, fake currency notes of Rs.40,000/- and Rs.60,000/- were recovered and the allegation against this applicant is that he fled away from the place of occurrence alongwith other co-

accused.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no evidence is available against the present applicant and the witnesses have not stated about this applicant. He further submits that the charge sheet in this case has been filed which would show that the evidence is not available.

4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

5. Perused the case diary, charge sheet and the statements of witnesses Tulsiram, Prem Das etc., wherein it is stated that the applicant has fled away from the scene while the raid was conducted.

6. Taking into consideration such statements and the allegations against this applicant, I am not inclined to allow this anticipatory bail application. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE Rao