Karan Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 1567 of 2020 • Dhansay Chauhan, S/o Shobharam Chauhan, Aged about 33 years, R/o Arand, PS Pithaura, Tahsil Pithaura, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Police Station- Sankara, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ---- Respondent with MCRC No. 1752 of 2020 • Karan Kumar, S/o Shri Lal Dhruv, Aged about 31 years, R/o village Ward No. 11, Chuiha, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Police Station- Sankara, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Advocate in MCRC No. 1567/202 For Applicant : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate in MCRC No. 1752/2020 For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 11/08/2020

1. The accused/applicant Dhansay Chauhan has moved his second bail application in MCRC No. 1567/2020 whereas applicant Karan Kumar has filed first bail application in MCRC No. 1752/2020 under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 131/2019 registered at Police Station Sankara, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under

Sections 341 and 397 of IPC and under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

2. The prosecution story, in brief is that, on 08.07.2019 applicants stopped the Development OfÏcer of Annapurna Finance Private Limited and looted Rs. 85,350/- by pouring petrol over him and showing country made pistol.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the star witnesses have been examined and they do not support the case of the prosecution. The applicants are in jail since 16.07.2019 and 13.07.2019 respectively, there is no likelihood of their case being decided in near future, therefore, the present appellants may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application submitting that the applicants did a very heinous crime, therefore, no case is made out to release the applicants on bail.

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

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, especially nature and gravity of crime in question, at this stage, I am not inclined to release them on bail.

7. Accordingly, their applications filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is rejected.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Vasant