Smt. Geeta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.CR.C.(A). No. 848 of 2018 Smt. Geeta, W/o. Late Santosh Kunjam, Aged About 39 Years, R/o. Village Keshal, Police Station-Gaindatola, District- Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. At Present Address Govt. Middle School, Arjuni (Teacher), District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

----Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Lav Sharma, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order On Board 28/08/2018 1.

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.108/2018, registered at Police Station - Dongargaon, District - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 354, 354-A, 354(C), 354 (M), 509, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicant has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail. 2.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant, that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. No case is made out against her on he basis of the material present in the case diary. Co-accused persons have been enlarged on regular bail by this Court as well as by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

3.

Per contra learned State counsel opposes the application for grant of bail and the submissions made in this respect. 4.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary and the documents placed on record. 5.

The case against the applicant and other co-accused person is this that one co-accused Ajesh Kumar Shukla is alleged to have outraged the modesty of the victim in this case. When the complaints were made against co-accused, this applicant is alleged to have suppressed the same to save the co-accused person. 6.

Considered the submissions made and the documents placed on record. After due consideration on all the material present in the case record, this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which the applicant should be extended the benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

7.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is allowed.

8.

It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, she shall be released on bail by the officer arresting her on executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :

(i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required;

(ii) that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with

the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) that the applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Balram