Manoj Singh Thakur v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No.1652 of 2019 • Manoj Singh Thakur S/o Late Mohar Singh Thakur Aged About 57 Years Posted As Superintendent Engineer, Urban Administration And Development Department, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh R/o House No. Sr. Mig- 285, Sector-2, Deendayal Upadhyay Nagar, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Anand Verma, Dy.GA Single Bench:Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 26/04/2019 Heard.

1.

This is fourth bail application. Earlier three bail applications were rejected by this Court.

2.

The applicant has moved this application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.40/2015 registered at Police Station Anti Corruption Bureau, Raipur, District Raipur for the offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. 3.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that this repeat bail application has been filed by the applicant mainly on the ground that the applicant has undergone jail sentence of 1 year and 2 months. It is submitted that out of 130 witnesses, only 32 witnesses have been examined, and therefore, at this stage, when the applicant has already undergone 1 year and 2 months of jail sentence, he may be granted bail. 4.

Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application by submitting that the trial cannot be said to be delayed, where large number of witnesses have already been examined and looking to the nature and gravity of

allegations against the applicant and the fact that earlier three bail applications were rejected, therefore, at this stage, the applicant is not entitled to bail. 5.

Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the parties and gravity of allegations against the applicant, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

6.

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. However, the applicant would be at liberty to revive his application after four months, if trial is not concluded. SD/- ( Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Tumane