High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/236/2016rejected

B. Shiva Kishor v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-01-27Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 236 of 2016 • B. Shiva Kishor S/o Ishwar Rao Aged About 38 Years R/o Bhattipara, Kirandul, Police Station Kirandul, Distt. Dantewada, Chhattisgarh.

--- Petitioner

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station Dantewada, Distt. Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For the applicant :

Mrs. Indira Tripathi, Advocate.

For the Respondent :

Mr. Arvind Shukla, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 27.01.2016

1. This is an application filed u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking granting of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 45 of 2015 registered at Police station Dantewada, Distt. Dantewada (C.G) for the offences punishable under sections 436, 457, 380, 411, 201 of IPC.

2. As per the prosecution case, on 23.04.2015 a theft was committed in the house and shop of Jagdish Malviya and other household goods were stolen and after committing theft, the house and shop were set ablaze. During such theft, 18 goods were also stolen and thereafter, the applicant tried to take the amount from ATM and on the basis of video footage, the applicant was identified and arrested and on his memoranum, it was revealed that the stolen silver and gold was sold to coaccused Animesh Karmakar. On the basis of such memorandum certain recovery silver and gold ornaments and other goods was made from the said co-accused and the seized articles were identified.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no evidence available against the applicant to connect him with the crime and though on the basis of ATM footage, the applicant was arrested but the ATM card has not been seized and therefore, the

applicant has been falsely implicated in this case.

4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

5. A perusal of the case diary and charge sheet would show that from the memorandum of co-accused Animesh Kumar, certain stolen articles/goods were recovered and they have been identified.

6. Considering the way in which the offence committed as the house was set on fire after committing theft and also considering the degree of allegations and evidence available against the present applicant, I am not inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE Rao