Sheshnarayan Sharma v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 4492 of 2020 • Sheshnarayan Sharma, S/o Shri Hari Narayan Sharma, Aged about 24 years, R/o village Bhatagaon, Thana Purani Basti Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh, Through - Station House Officer, PSPurani Basti Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 19/08/2020

1. The accused/applicant has moved this first bail application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 163/2020 registered at Police Station- Purani Basti Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506(B), 323, 327 and 324 of the IPC and under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

2. The prosecution story in brief is that, the complainant Narendra Kumar Nishad lodged the oral report at PS -Purani Basti Raipur against the present applicant and others with the averment that he was watching the tik-tok with Lekhu Yadav and Narendra Gond at that time the applicant reached there and asked amount for drinking liquor, when he refused complainant abuses him with filthy language and threatening for dire consequences and caused the injury to left side of leg with knife so on the basis of report Thana Police arrested the present applicant and recorded his memorandum seized the knife from the applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is

innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the applicant having no concern with the complainant but due to some hat talk, he has lodged the report by implicating the applicant in a case of extortion and causing the injury. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 07.06.2020, there is no likelihood of his case being decided in near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the allegation against the applicant is of serious in nature; therefore, no case is made out for grant of bail.

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

6. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of applicant and further considering that the applicant is in jail since 07.06.2020, and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

7. Accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one local surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Vasant