Motilal Paradhi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 1663 of 2019 • Raj @ Rajesh Paradhi S/o Bankilal Paradhi Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Ghatiya Khurd, Police Station Nandani Khurd, Tahsil Ahiwara, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station, Kumhari, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Non Applicant MCRC No. 1780 of 2019 • Motilal Paradhi S/o Gajeram Paradhi Aged About 65 Years R/o Village- Ghatiyakhurd, Police Station- Nandani Nagar, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kumhari, DistrictDurg, Chhattisgarh ---- Non Applicant For the Applicants :

Mr. C.K. Sahu Advocate For Non Applicant :

Mr. SRJ Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board 24.

04.2019 1.

Since both the petitions arise from same crime No., these bail petitions are being disposed off simultaneously.

2.

These are first bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the applicants before this Court and no other bail application is pending before any other Court.

3.

Perused the case diary provided by the learned counsel for the State in connection with Crime No.22/2019 registered at Police Station- Kumhari Civil and Revenue DistrictDurg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 11 (1) ?k of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act and Sections 4, 6, 7, 10 and 11 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act.

4.

Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 05.02.2019 applicant Raj @ Rajesh Paradhi was taking 26 bulls by beating, and applicant Motilal Paradhi was taking 30 bulls by beating to slaughter house without giving them fodder. 5.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have no criminal background, they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case, therefore, they shall be released on bail.

6.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application, however, submits that there is no antecedent against the applicants. 7.

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the fact that there is no likelihood of the accused to abscond and tamper the evidence, it is directed that if each applicant furnishes one solvent surety for a sum of Rs.25,000/- along with a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, they shall be released on bail.

8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) Judge Parul