Vikram Singh Songara And Others v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.CR.C.(A). No. 1040 of 2016
1. Vikram Singh Songara, S/o. Kon Singh Songara, aged about 68 years, R/o. Village-Bilesari, P.S. - Hathuniya, District - Pratapgarh (Rajasthan).
2. Jitendra Singh Rathore, S/o. Indrasingh Rathore, aged about 45 years, R/o. 55 Shakti Nagar, Opp. A.P.N.C., Yogeshwar Nagar Road, Vaijalpur Ahamdabad (Gujrat).
3. Ranjeet Singh, S/o. Shri Vikram Singh, aged about 27 years, R/o. Village- Bilesari, P.S. - Hathuniya, Distt. Pratapgarh (Rajasthan). ----Applicants
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Station House Officer, Police Station : Mahila Thana, District - Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Anant Bajpai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 09/12/2016 1.
Apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.37/2015 registered at Police Station- Mahila Thana, District - Raipur (C.G.), for offence punishable under Section 498(A), 406, 506/34 of Indian Penal Code, the applicants have preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail.
2.
As per the prosecution case, the complainant, Sangeeta was married to Ranjeet Singh on 23.11.2008 and thereafter, she joined her matrimonial home at Bilseri, Rajasthan. Subsequently, after two years i.e. in the year 2010, she came to Raipur and the husband also started residing thereafter, the husband went back and it is the case of the prosecution after a day of the marriage i.e. on 24.11.2008 the applicants demanded money for dowry and
subsequently has also committed criminal breach of trust in respect of Stridhan. Thereby the offence has been committed. 3.
Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that earlier the applicant No.1, Vikram Singh was enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 21.04.2016 in M.Cr.C.(A) No.381/16, applicant No.2, Jitendra Singh Rathore was enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 02.03.2016 in M.Cr.C.(A) No.177/2016 and applicant No.3, Ranjeet Singh was enlarged on bail vide order dated 04.08.2016 in M.Cr.C.(A) No.628/2016 and at the time of filing of charge-sheet, Section 406 of I.P.C. has been added, which was also existing in the earlier FIR, therefore, the applicants may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
4.
Per contra, learned counsel for the state opposes the bail application.
5.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6.
Perused the earlier bail orders. Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that earlier the allegations were considered and anticipatory bail was granted to the applicants. Taking into such fact, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicants.
7.
Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicants in connection with the aforesaid offence, they shall be released on bail by the officer arresting them on executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. The applicants shall also abide by the following conditions :
(i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
(iii) that the applicants shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Balram