Mayank Thakur @ Dadu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7341 of 2020 • Mayank Thakur @ Dadu S/o Khomlal Thakur, aged about 18 years, R/o House No. 112/H, Risali Sector, Bhilai, Near BSF OfÏce, P.S. Nevai, Tehsil and District Durg (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through : The Station House OfÏcer Nevai, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri B.P. Singh, Advocate For Respondent :

Shri Rakesh Sahu, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 28/01/2021 1.

The applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.147/2019, registered at Police Station - Nevai, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380, 411, 34 IPC.

2.

Earlier bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merit.

3.

The allegation against the present applicant is that he committed theft of golden, silver ornaments and cash of Rs.15,000/- in the house of complainant Parshuram Chandrakar when he had gone to Hyderabad for the treatment of her daughter. Based on this, offence has been registered. The present applicant has been taken into custody on 12.10.2019.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He also

submits that after rejection of first bail application, two seizure witnesses namely Yogeshwar Narayan (PW/3) and Goverdhan Dewangan (PW/4) have been examined in the case before the trial Court and they have not supported the case of the prosecution and turned hostile. He also submits that the applicant is in custody since 12.10.2019 and looking to the detention period, he may be released on bail. 5.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposing the bail application submits that the applicant has criminal antecedent and as many as 12-15 cases of the same nature have been registered against him.

6.

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

7.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence and further considering the fact that the applicant is in custody since 12.10.2019, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

8.

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9.

It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

Certified copy, as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Pekde