Parmeshwar @ Chhotu Dhuri v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3621 of 2020 • Parmeshwar @ Chhotu Dhuri, S/o Shivkumar Dhuri, Aged about 22 years, R/o village Barela, PS- Jarhagaon, District Mungeli (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh, Through - SHO, PS- Jarhagaon, District Mungeli (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Devesh G. Kela, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Vipin Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Mr. Raghvendra Verma, G.A. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 13.07.2020 • The accused/applicant has moved his first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 103/2020 registered at Police Station- Jarhagaon, District Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323 and 436 of Indian Penal Code.

• According to the prosecution story, on 28.05.2020, the complainant Vinod Yadav lodged a report at Police StationJarhagaon, alleging therein that he is working as Chowkidar in High School, Barela and has been assigned duty in Quarantine Centre, where the labours have been quarantined and at about 09:30 pm, the applicant demanded key of quarantine centre, which was refused by the complainant, due to which, the applicant slapped him and at about 11:00 pm, the temporary house of the complainant has been burned by electric current. On the basis of above report, the alleged offences have been registered and the applicant has been arrested. • Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid

case. He further submits that the there is no eye witness and no one has been seen the applicant while burning the temporary house of the complainant and the applicant has falsely been roped in this case only on the basis of suspicion. He next contended that the applicant is in jail since 30.05.2020, therefore, he may be granted bail.

• On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

• I have heard learned Counsel for the parties. • Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of the applicant, as trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release him on bail.

• Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. • It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/-, with one local surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Vasant