High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/236/2017dismissed

Vikky v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-01-25Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 236 of 2017 • Vikky S/o Parmanand Aged About 24 Years Caste Ghashi, R/o Dipatoli Jashpur, Tahsil & District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh through thana In Charge, Police StationJashpurnagar, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent For the applicant :

Mr. Anurag Khatri, Advocate For the Respondent :

Mr. Arvind Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 25.1.2017

1. This is second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 64 of 2016 registered at P.S. Jashpurnagar, Distt. Jashpur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 457 & 380 of IPC.

2. As per the prosecution case, on 19.03.2016 theft took place in the house of complainant Wilsan Toppo. It is alleged that the applicant along-with other co-accused has committed theft of one box wherein certain documents were kept alongwith the ornaments. Subsequently, in the memorandum of the applicant one ear ring which was stolen was recovered from the applicant and the said article was identified.

3. The earlier bail petition was dismissed on 03.10.2016 on merits and further considering that as many as 7 cases were registered against him.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in three cases the applicant has been acquitted which are u/ss 366,

376 IPC and in further cases u/s 25 & 27 of the Arms Act and also u/s 324 of IPC. He further submits that apart from this, the applicant has also been acquitted in four other cases u/s 107 & 116 of Cr.P.C.,

5. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail and submits that apart from the above, 4 cases u/ss 456 & 354, another case u/s 354, 294, 506 of IPC and 5 cases u/s 107, 110 of Cr.P.C., were also registered against him.

6. Taking into the past antecedents, in the considered view of this Court no change of circumstances appear to have been happened to reconsider the bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.

Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o