← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/1720/2017dismissed

Indarsay @ Suresh @ Sudu Nageshiya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-03-28Hon'Ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 1720 OF 2017 Indarsay @ Suresh @ Sudu Nageshiya S/o Shiv Prasad Nageshiya, aged about 20 years, R/o Village - Bharatpur, Bhursatoli, Police Station-Shankargarh, District-Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG) ---Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Police Station-Shankargarh, District-Balrampur-Ramanujganj (CG) ---Non-applicant For Applicant :

Mr. A.K.Yadav, Advocate.

For-Non-applicant :

Mr. Sumit Jhanwar, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai Order on Board 28/03/2017 Heard the matter finally 1.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is facing trial in Special Sessions Trial No.7/2015 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Ramanujganj, District BalrampurRamanujganj (CG) and he was arrested on 28.3.2015 under Sections 363, 366 & 376 of the IPC and Sections 4 & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Ten witnesses have been examined including the prosecutrix, however, the prosecutrix remained hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. Other witness i.e. father of the prosecutrix was also hostile. The investigating officer has also been examined. He would further submits that as there is no any evidence adduced by the prosecution during trial, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

2.

Per contra, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State opposes the arguments advanced on behalf of the applicant. 3.

Perused the material.

4.

Considering the evidence collected by the prosecution for trial and other facts also, this is not the proper forum to evaluate the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and their admissibility in the matter.

5.

After perusal of the material collected by the prosecution, I am not inclined to allow the instant bail application. Consequently, the instant bail application is rejected. However, considering the detention period of the applicant, the Court below is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible preferably within a period of six months from the next date of hearing.

Sd/- (Chandra Bhushan Bajpai) JUDGE B/-