Sunita Singh Rajput v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Page No.1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 1347 of 2018 • Sunita Singh Rajput D/o Balihar Singh Rajput Aged About 26 Years R/o Devbhog, Police Station Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh, District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :

Mrs. Indira Tripathi, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Mr. N.K. Mehta, Panel Lawyer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order On Board 31/10/2018

1. The applicant has preferred this bail application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.206/2017 registered at Police Station- Devbhog, District - Gariyaband(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 186 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and Section 3 of the Chhattisgarh Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage or Loss to Property) Act, 2010.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The fact is this that prosecutrix is a media person she was taking byte from one injured

Page No.2 person in the hospital at Devbhog when the complainant came and misbehaved with the applicant regarding which she immediately filed the complaint in the police-station Devbhog, on which no action was taken. On a later date, on 15.11.2017 a false FIR has been lodged by the complainant against this applicant, hence, she is facing apprehension to arrest. Hence, it is prayed that she may be released on anticipatory bail.

3. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submissions made in this respect. It is submitted that the applicant has filed application for anticipatory directly before this Court and looking to the evidence present on record she is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

4. Heard both the parties and perused the case diary.

5. It is alleged that on the date of incident this applicant was taking byte from one injured person in the hospital at Devbhog when the complainant, who is doctor came and tried to start the medical treatment of the injured person then this applicant deterred him in performance of his duty and also used abusive words and threatened him. Hence, this case.

6. Considered on the entire material present in the case diary, I am of this view that this is a fit case where applicant should be benefited with grant of anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of applicant is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, she shall be released on bail by the officer arresting her on her executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the

Page No.3 concerned Investigating Officer. The applicant shall also abide by the following conditions :

(i) that the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation before the investigating officer as and when required;

(ii) that the applicant 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 applicant shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial; and (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to her by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge NIsha