Pankesh Kumar Rathore v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 1738 of 2021 • Pankesh Kumar Rathore s/o. Baliram Rathore aged about 27 yers, r/o. Village Dharshiv PS Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa. ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Station Pamgarh, District JanjgirChampa Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :

Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Lalit Jangde, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 17-05-2021

1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail as he is in jail since 1-2-2001 in connection with Crime No. 41 of 2021 registered at Police Station Pamgarh, district Janjgir-Champa (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 498-A/34 of IPC. of IPC.

2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the present applicant on 7-52017 according to Hindu Rites and rituals. After marriage, present applicant along with his parents and relatives started demanding dowry from the complainant and also treated her with cruelty.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that after marriage complainant resided with the applicant in her matrimonial house for a period of three months and she went to her parental house and she never came back to her matrimonial house. He would further submits that after passing of four years she lodged false report against the applicant and there is no evidence against the applicant that neither he demanded dowry nor subjected the complainant with cruelty. He would further submit that the applicant is in custody since 1-2-2021 and trial is likely to take some time for its disposal. therefore, the present applicant may be granted bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the bail application.

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations made against the applicant which appears to be general allegations, further considering the detention period of the applicant, conclusion of trial make take some time and without further comments on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case to grant the bail to the applicant.

7. Accordingly, the application is allowed an it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two solvent sureties for the

like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said trial court, till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Vacation Judge Raju