Vinit Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Proceeding through Video Conferencing MCRCA No. 1730 of 2020 Vinit Singh S/o Shri Laxman Singh, Aged About 41 Years R/o M.I.G-17, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Station House Officer, P.S. Sirgitti, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For the Applicants :

Shri Sourabh Sharma, Advocate For the State :

Shri Lalit Jangde, Govt. Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Chandravanshi Order On Board /05/2021

1. I.A. Nos. 2 & 3 application for urgent hearing, I.A. No.4 application for hearing during summer vacation and I.A. No.5 application for exemption from filing affidavit are allowed.

2. I.A. No.1 application for grant of ad-interim bail is not pressed as the matter is heard finally.

3. This is first application for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the applicant.

4. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.482/2020 registered at Police Station- Sirgitti, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 327, 34 & 506 of IPC.

5. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that FIR was lodged against the applicant on 18/10/2020 by father of applicant alleging that he demanded money for consuming liquor and when he refused he committed obscene act and caused hurt on his face and gave threatened to cause his death.

6. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent

and has been falsely implicated in the present case, there is property dispute between brothers of the applicant and father, applicant is a social worker, except under Section 327 of IPC all other offences are bailable, therefore, he may be granted anticipatory bail.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. He further submitted that there is no criminal antecedents of the applicant reported in police case diary.

8. Looking to above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, considering the fact that there is property dispute between the parties, no criminal antecedent of the applicant has been shown, this Court is inclined to give benefit of anticipatory bail to the accused.

9. Consequently, application filed under Section 438 of CrPC is allowed allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the Applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, he shall be released on bail by the officer arresting him 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 himself available for interrogation before the concerned police officer as and when required;

(ii) that the Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat undue influence to the prosecution witness (iii) the Applicant shall appear before the concerned Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (N.K. Chandravanshi) Vacation Judge Kamde