Lakhan Barwa v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5637 of 2019 • Prasann Kumar S/o - Bihari Ram Aged About 30 Years R/o - Village Ghosa, Police Station Jhilmili, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Jhilmili, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent MCRC No. 5696 of 2019 • Bhuneshwar Rajwade @ Bhandari, S/o Baliram Rajwade Aged About 36 Years R/o Village - Danauli, Police Station - Jhilmili, District, Surajpur Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station, Jhilmili, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent MCRC No. 6249 of 2019 • Lakhan Barwa S/o Ramdeo Aged About 40 Years By Caste, Cherwa, R/o Village Kishun Nagar, Lota Bahara, Police Station Gandhinagar, District Sarguja Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Jhilmili, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent

For Applicants : Shri Gyan Prakash Shukla and Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocates For Respondent/State : Shri Samir Sharma, Dy GA Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 06/11/2019 As all the above three M.Cr.C's arise out of the same crime number they are being disposed of by this common order. The applicants have filed these applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as they are in custody in connection with Crime No. 44/2018 registered at police station Jhilmili, district Surajpur(CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 420,,467,468,471,120-B and 34 IPC.

As per case of the prosecution, the applicant along with coaccused persons have executed a registered sale deed of some land at Village Dhanauli by submitting forged documents. Counsels for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated and that the name of the applicants does not find place either in the written report or in the FIR. It is further submitted that the offences alleged against the applicants are triable by the Magistrate; the charge sheet has already been filed and looking to the conduct of the prosecution it is clear that the trial will take time for its conclusion. It is also submitted that the applicants are in jail since 07.05.19.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the

bail applications.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the detention period of the applicants, I am inclined to release them on regular bail. Accordingly, their applications filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicants' furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned court for their appearance before it as and when directed, they shall be released on bail. Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge suguna