Punai Uraon v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3086 of 2015 • Punai Uraon s/o. Shri Somra Uraon, aged about 45 years, r/o. Village Kilkila, P.S. & Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh, Civil & Revenue District Raigarh (CG).

---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Lailunga, District Raigarh (CG). ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Mr. M.K. Sinha, Advocate.

For Respondent/State :

Mrs. Madhunisha Singh, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 6/7/2015

1. The applicant has moved this application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail, who has been arrested on 18-52015 in connection with Crime No. 131 of 2015 registered at Police Station Lailunga, District Raigarh (CG), for the offence punishable under Sections 4, 6 & 10 of Chhattsgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004 and Section 11 of t he Pashu Kururala Adhiniyam.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the present applicant along with other co-accused was found transporting 48 scheduled agricultural cattle to the State of Jharkhand for the purpose of slaughtering and thereby he committed the aforesaid offence.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the present applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He would further submit that the aforesaid cattle were not being transported for slaughtering purpose and in fact, the applicant is an agriculturist, charge-sheet

has been filed in the case and the applicant is in jail since 18-52015, therefore, he may be released on bail. 4.

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

5.

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

6.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, material collected by the prosecution and further considering the number of scheduled agricultural cattle which were being transported to the other State for the purpose of slaughtering, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

7.

Accordingly, the instant bail application is liable to be and is hereby rejected.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Raju