High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/9521/2020rejected

Sachin Sandilya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2021-02-04Hon'Ble Shri Justice Gautam Chourdiya2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 9521 of 2020 • Sachin Sandilya S/o Pappu Sandilya Aged About 21 Years R/o Mulmula, P.S Mulmula, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh In Present R/o Chhote Atarmuda, Raigarh, Tahsil And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-Applicant/State For Applicant :

Shri Ashish Gupta, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State :

Shri Shrikant Kaushik, P.L.

Hon'ble Justice Shri Gautam Chourdiya Order on Board 04.02.2021

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested on 06.11.2020 in connection with Crime No. 306/2020, at Police Station- Chakradhar Nagar, District- Raigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 341, 394, 34 of I.P.C.

2. The allegation against the applicant is that on 28.10.2020 about 9 PM near Employement Office the applicant alongwith coaccused person stopped the victim and on point of sword robbed Rs. 3,280/-. On report being lodged to the above effect under the aforesaid offence have been registered against the accused persons.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations against the applicant are false and fabricated, he is falsely implicated in the case. The applicant/accused is in jail since

06.11.2020 and he has no criminal antecedents and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, therefore, at this stage, he may be granted bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Non-Applicant/State opposes prayer for grant of bail and submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents.

5. Having considered the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, taking into consideration the nature of allegation, act of loot committed by the applicant, the manner in which incident took place, I am not inclined to grant bail to the present applicant.

6. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.

7. It is made clear that if the trial is not concluded within a period of four months from today the applicant shall be at liberty to repeat his prayer for bail by filing a fresh application in this regard. Sd/- (Gautam Chourdiya) Judge Nadim