← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/2576/2021allowed

Pushpa @ Shyama Devi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2021-05-12Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2567 of 2021 • Prachi Tiwari S/o Shri Prashant Tiwari Aged About 27 Years R/o Near Bharat Gas Agency, Police Station- Barra, District- Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- City Kotwali, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent MCRC No. 2576 of 2021 • Pushpa @ Shyama Devi W/o Shri Babu Singh Aged About 56 Years R/o Qt. No. 144, Jarauli, Phase - I Barra, Kanpur Nagar (U.P.) ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicants : Shri Pushkar Sinha and Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocates For Respondent /State : Shri Devendra Pratap Singh, Dy.AG Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board By Virtual Hearing 12/05/2021 As both the MCRCs arise out of same crime number, they are

being heard and disposed of by this common order. The accused/applicants have moved these bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.55/2021 registered at Police Station - City Kotwali, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 379,34 of the IPC. It is the case of the prosecution that a report was lodged by the complainant alleging that on the date of incident, three women customers entered his jewellery shop and stole two sets of gold bracelets. It is alleged that when he checked at night, he came to know from the cctv footage that theft has been committed in his shop. Counsels for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that the applicants are in custody since 27.02.2021 and 02.03.2021 respectively and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, they may be released on bail.

On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail applications.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular, the detention period of the applicants, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which, the applicants should be enlarged on regular bail.

Accordingly, the applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on

each of them furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- with one local surety each in like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their appearance before the said Court as and when directed till the disposal of the trial.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Vacation Judge suguna