Manual Lakra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 3345 OF 2015 Manual Lakra (wrongly shown in the order sheet as Manual Lakr), S/o Gurwaru Lakra, aged about 25 years, Caste-Oraon, R/o Vill- Haldijhariya (Karrajor) Thana-Bagbahar, District Jashpur (C.G.), civil and revenue district Jashpur, Distt.-Jashpur (C.G.).

---Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House Officer, P.S. Bagbahar, Distt. -Jashpur (C.G.) ---Non-applicant For Applicant :

Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Advocate.

For-Non-applicant :

Mr. O.P. Sahu, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 20/07/2015 1.

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 167/2014, registered at Police Station Bagbahar, District Jashpur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 370(3), 371 & 374 of Indian Penal Code. 2.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 22/09/2014 present applicant Manual Lakra abducted six boys and four girls from village Haldi Jhariya for the purpose of exploitation and transported them to Delhi and engaged them to the Placement Agency run by accused persons namely, Smt. Nirmala Kujur & Gourav Sahu, and in the said placement agency accused namely- Amrit Tigga provided work to the children and thereby the applicant has committed the offence of trafficking & abduction and unlawfully compel them to work as a labour against their will.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that co-accused persons have already been enlarged on regular bail in M. Cr. C. Nos. 878/2015, 1198/2015 & 1297/2015 vide order dated 15/04/2015 and case of the present applicant is similar to the other co-accused persons who have been enlarged on bail. He would further submit that applicant is in jail since 31/10/2014 and no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in jail. He would lastly submit that charge sheet has been filed, therefore, he may be released on bail.

4.

Learned State counsel would oppose the prayer for grant of bail and submit that all the victims were minor and they were abducted by present applicant and other co-accused for exploiting them and, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for regular bail.

5.

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

6.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case; further taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence; role of the present applicant in offence in question and case of the present applicant is distinguishable with other co-accused persons as applicant abducted and taken 10 minors from their village for the purpose of exploitation, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on regular bail. 7.

Accordingly, bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is rejected.

8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE Tiwari