Chottelal Pal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 679 of 2020 • Chottelal Pal S/o Natthuprasad Pal Aged About 55 Years R/o L I G 2001, Veer Savarkar Nagar Near Udta Hanuman Temple Heerapur, Tatibandh Tehsil and District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S H O Police Station Kabir Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent _______________________________________________________________ For Applicant : Shri Vivek Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Shri Ghanshyam Patel, G.A.

__________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 13/07/2020

1. The matter is heard through video conferencing.

2. The Applicant has preferred the first bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 73/2020 registered at Police Station Kabir Nagar, District - Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 323, 506/34 of Indian Penal Code.

3. According to the case of the prosecution, applicant had paid some advance amount to the complainant for purchase of cattle food. It is alleged that complainant had failed to supply cattle food to the applicant, therefore, applicant demanded for return of his money and

during that altercation, allegedly, applicant and his son assaulted the complainant due to which he sustained injuries on his head and other parts of the body. Matter was reported by the complainant on the date of incident itself. On the basis of the said, offence has been registered.

4. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that virtually on the date of incident when applicant demanded his money back from the complainant, then complainant and his other employees abused the applicant and his son due to which they themselves sustained grievous injuries on their body parts. Firstly, applicant made the report against complainant and his employees and on the basis of the said offence under Section 307 of IPC has been registered against complainant. Therefore, in counter-blast, a false and fabricated report was lodged by the complainant. It is further submitted that if the entire case is taken as it is, prima facie, no case under Section 307 of IPC can be made out against applicant.

Complainant sustained only one injury on his skull, which is of simple nature. Therefore, the maximum offence of the alleged act committed by the applicant falls within the ambit of Section 323 of IPC. Thus, it is prayed that applicant may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

5. Learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application.

6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties.

7. Taking into consideration the submissions put-forth on behalf of the

parties, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution and particularly considering the fact that firstly, report was lodged by the applicant against complainant and the injury sustained by the complainant is of simple nature, therefore, without further commenting on other merits of the case, I am inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the present applicant.

8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9.

It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/Presiding Officer of the concerned trial Court. He shall also abide by all the following terms and conditions : (i) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court, (ii) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Prakash