Rajnish Mishra And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Page No.1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.CR.C.(A) No. 1038 of 2015

1. Rajnish Mishra, aged about 38 years, S/o. Dr. Arun Mishra, R/o. Village- Marra, Tahsil - Patan, District Durg (C.G.)

2. Waman Baghel, aged about 36 years, S/o. Shankar Baghel, R/o. Village - Brelaudi, Tahsil - Patan, District - Durg (C.G.) ----Applicants

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Station House Officer, Police Station - Utai, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. B.P. Singh, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Anant Bajpai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 28/10/2015 1.

Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.250/2015 registered at Police Station- Utai, District - Durg (C.G.), for offence punishable under Section 294, 506, 323, 427, 186, 353 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicants have preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail.

2.

As per the prosecution case, a complaint was lodged by V.K. Banjare, Assistant Engineer, CSEB, Rural Durg alleging that on 05.09.2015 there was obstruction in supply of electricity at Village-Gadadih and when they went to repair, they were assaulted by the applicants. Thereafter, the report was made against the applicants. 3.

Learned counsel for the applicants submit that there are 300 to 350 villagers, who had surrounded the electricity office and only two

Page No.2 persons can not be apprehended, therefore, he prays that the applicants may be extended the benefit of anticipatory bail. 4.

Per contra, the learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

5.

Having considered the fact that in the FIR, the applicants have been named, therefore, it can not be stated that no offence is made out against the applicants. In view of the above, I am not inclined to extend benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant. 6.

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is dismissed. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Balram