Azruddin Sheikh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. NO. 2751 OF 2016 Azruddin Sheikh, S/o Meenazuddin Sheikh, aged about 25 years, R/o Geetanjali Talkies, Khan Masjid, Hansapuri, Nagpur, Thana & TahsilGandhibaag, District Nagpur (M.H.) ... Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Station House Officer, Police Station Simga, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant :

Mr. A.S. Rajput, Advocate.

For Non-applicant/State :

Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Dy. Govt.

Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 09/06/2016 1.

This is the first application filed under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of bail to the Applicant who is in jail since 31.3.2016 in connection with Crime No. 26/2016 registered at Police Station- Simga, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, for the offence punishable under Sections 365, 429 of IPC, Sections 4, 6, 7, 10, 11 of the Chhattisgarh Krishak Pashu Parirakshan Adhiniyam and Sections 11(1), (d), 47, 49, 50 of the Pashuo Ke Prati Krurta Adhiniyam and also under Sections 91, 81 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

2.

Case as per the prosecution against the Applicant is that he is the owner of a mini Truck (Mazda), bearing Registration No. MH40-N/850, and on 5.2.2016 the said vehicle is said to have been transporting 27 cattle from Chhattisgarh to Maharashtra for the purpose of slaughtering. 3.

Learned Counsel for Applicant submits that the Applicant who was the registered owner of the vehicle had already sold the said vehicle to one Shrikant Rangali as early as on 16.10.2014 but in the Transport

-2authority's office the change in the ownership of the said vehicle was not registered. He further submits that the Applicant was not present at the time of incident that took place on 5.2.2016 and he has been made accused only on account of the fact that the said vehicle stood registered in his name.

4.

Learned Counsel for the State however opposes the bail application on the ground that the Applicant was also present in the vehicle as has been reflected from the statement of one of the witnesses, namely Santram Sahu, who is said to have been chasing the said vehicle and therefore the Applicant may not be released on bail. 5.

Without commenting on merits, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case more particularly the fact that the Applicant has already remained in jail for more than two months, this Court is of the opinion that the present is a fit case where the Applicant can be enlarged on bail.

6.

Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is allowed. It is directed that the Applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety of the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court for his appearance as and when directed.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ V. Judge