Sushil Minj v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 4270 of 2016 • Sushil Minj S/o Antonish Minj Aged About 18 Years Caste Uranw, R/o Village Dhouthatoli, Police Chouky Lodam, Tahsil Jashpur, Civil & Revenue District Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
--- Petitioner
Versus
• State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Chouky Lodam, Thana Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.
--- Respondent For the applicant :
Ms. Reena Singh, Advocate For the Respondent :
Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 02.08.2016
1. This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 48/2016 registered at P.S. Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 384, 506/34 IPC and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act.
2. As per the prosecution case, on 27.01.2016, while the victim was going to her home, at that time, she was intercepted by the applicant along-with other accused and they took her away to a distant place where they demanded Rs.10 lakhs and also threatened that in case the amount is not paid, her nude photographs will be uploaded in the face-book and ultimately the settlement to pay Rs.8 lakhs was arrived at. Thereafter the report was made on 29.02.2016, therefore, the offence is committed.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially a report was made against unknown person and the FIR is
delayed by one month. He further submits that the identification parade is also delayed and nothing has been recovered from the applicant, therefore, the applicant has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the charge sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 06.03.2016, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.
4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail.
5. Perused the statement of victim as also the documents, which show that the applicant was identified.
6. Considering the statement of identification, the nature of offence and degree of allegations levelled and the evidence which is available in case diary, I am not inclined to allow this bail application. Accordingly it is rejected. Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o