Vinod Tirkey v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7379 of 2017 Vinod Tirkey, S/o. Larang Sai, Aged about 23 years, R/o. Village Maltipur, Police Station Kamleshwarpur, Tahsil Mainpat, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kamleshwarpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant For Applicant :

Mr. Vivek Kumar Pandey, Advocate For State :

Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/03/2018 1.

This is an application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 28/2017 registered at Police Station Kamleshwarpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 370(3)(4)(5)(6), 371/34 of Indian Penal Code. 2.

The present applicant is in jail since 25.04.2017 in connection with the aforesaid Crime number.

3.

As per the prosecution case, the present applicant is said to have abducted four minor girls Sunita Manjhi, Uma Manjhi, Fulsundari Manjhi and Rajkumari Manjhi from village Kamaleshwarpur, Tahsil Mainpat, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh to Delhi and where the present applicant is said to have sold the minor girls for an amount of Rs.25,000/- each and left them at Delhi under the custody of some other person, who in turn had sent the girls to different places for working as maids.

4.

The counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated that since the applicant also is from the same village and because of some family dispute and enmity between the parties, he has been falsely implicated in the case. The counsel for the applicant also submits that the present applicant already has remained in custody for a period of about 11 months and therefore considering the period of custody also he deserves to be released on bail.

5.

The State counsel however opposing the bail application submits that the nature of allegation is quite serious and all the victims in the instant case are minor girls and thus prayed for rejection of the bail application.

6.

Having considered the statements of each of the victims it is reflected that the present applicant is said to have took the victims on the false pretext of taking them to Ambikapur instead took them to Delhi and where present applicant is said to have sold the minor girls to a different person at Delhi, who in turn, further sent these girls to different villages for working as maids.

7.

Given the allegations and taking into consideration the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail, the same therefore deserves to be and is accordingly rejected.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved