Sunil Chandravanshi And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 4256 of 2016

1. Sunil Chandravanshi S/o Hullas Chandravanshi Aged About 25 Years (Wrongly Mention in the the Impugned Order Ullasram Chandravanshi), Occupation Former, Cast Kurmi, R/o Village Kumhi, Thana Pandatarai, Distt. Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

2. Rupesh Chandravanshi S/o Jhumuk Chandravanshi Aged About 26 Years Occupation Former, Cast Kurmi, R/o Village Kumhi, Thana Pandatarai, Distt. Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

3. Chandraprakash Chandravanshi S/o Malik Ram Chandravanshi Aged About 32 Years Occupation Former, Cast Kurmi, R/o Village Kumhi, Thana Pandatarai, Distt. Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

--- Petitioners

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Pandatarai, Distt. Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. --- --- Respondent For the applicant :

Mr. Deepak Jain, Advocate For the Respondent :

Mrs. Shobha Kashyap, Govt. Advocate 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 applicants in connection with Crime No. 58/2016 registered at P.S. Pandatarai, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 332 & 342/34 of IPC.

2. As per the prosecution case, a report was made by one Deo Singh who is in job of Power Distribution Company Ltd., that he went to village Kumhe to rectify the electricity line and while the electricity line was being rectified, the applicants and other villages abused and assaulted the complainant, thereby he was prevented from doing his official duty.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the

applicants have been falsely implicated and the villagers have opposed the frequent disturbances of power supply to the village as such furious villagers raised their voice against the frequent power-cuts/disturbances. He further submits that MLC report shows that the injuries sustained by the complainant are simple in nature. It is further submitted that the charge sheet in this case has been filed and no further investigation is necessary, therefore, the applicants may be enlarged on bail.

4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail.

5. Perused the case diary documents.

6. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case especially the fact that the charge sheet in this case has been filed and further taking into consideration the MLC report which shows that the injuries are simple in nature, I am inclined to allow this bail application.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. They shall also appear before the trial Court as and when directed by the said Court. C.c. as per rules.

Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o