Rajesh Sonkar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 6434 of 2021 1.

Rajesh Sonkar S/o. Shri Makhan Sonkar, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Ward No. 08, Bajarpara Charama, Thana And Tahsil Charama, District North Baster Kanker (C.G.) (Late Wrongly Mentioned In Order) ---- Applicant

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer Charama, District North Baster Kanker (C.G.) (Narharpur P.S. Is Wrongly Mention In Order).

---- Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate.

For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Anand Verma, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya Order on Board 25/08/2021 1) The matter is heard through Video Conferencing. 2) Heard on admission.

3) The application is admitted for hearing.

4) With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 5) The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as he is in jail since 09/08/2021 in connection with Crime No. 104/2021 registered at Police Station Charama, District North Baster Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 34(2) of Chhattisgarh Excise Act. 6) Allegation against the applicant is that he was found in illegal possession of 31.080 bulk Ltrs. of country made liquor (Mahuwa). 7) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that co-accused Mrs. Rekha Sonker has already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 24/08/2021 in MCRC No. 6393/2021. He further

submits that the applicant has been arrested on 09/08/2021. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and trial is likely to take some time for its disposal due to COVID-19 Pandemic. Therefore, the applicant be released on bail by this Court. 8) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. However, he unable to explain regarding criminal antecedents of the applicant.

9) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the detention period of the applicant who is 36 years old, the applicant has no criminal antecedents as admitted by counsel for the applicant and there is also no mention about the same in the impugned order and that there is no apprehension of the applicant tampering with the evidence or absconding as admitted by both the Counsel, in particular the fact that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court, and that conclusion of trial may take some time due to COVID-19 Pandemic, the application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- i.

he 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 from disclosing such fact to the Court, ii.

he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, iii.

he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial, iv.

he shall strictly follow the COVID-19 protocol issued by the Central Govt./State Govt./Local Authority, v.

he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future.

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned Police Station forthwith who shall inform the trial Court in the event of applicant involving himself in similar offence in future. -Sd/- (Gautam Chourdiya) Judge Chandrakant