High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/5436/2017allowed

Sonu Nayak v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-09-27Hon'Ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5436 of 2017 • Sonu Nayak S/o Shri Kalicharan Nayak, Aged About 20 Years R/o New Laling Nagar, Khalwada, Near Petrol Pump Police Station Gudhiyari, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Ganj, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent For the applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gary Mukhopadhyay, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 27.09.2017

1. This is 3rd bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 291/2016 registered at Police Station Ganj, Distt. Raipur (C.G) for the offence punishable under Section 394 of IPC.

2. As per the prosecution case, on 10.10.2016 when the complainant was talking in his mobile, at that time, the applicant along-with other co-accused who were riding the Activa Scooter snatched the mobile of the complainant and tried to flee away. However, one of the accused was caught on the spot and the applicant fled away.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is third bail application. The first bail was dismissed on 12.01.2017 as withdrawn with liberty to repeat the same

after examination of the complainant and the subsequent bail application was simply withdrawn on 20.07.2017. He refers to the order sheets and submits that the complainant after dismissal is not coming to the Court despite issuance of bailable warrant. He referred to the certified copy of the order sheets and submits that similarly placed accused Ashish Mirjha has been enlarged on bail by this Court on 03.01.2017 in M.Cr.C.No.8315/2016.

4. Perused the order sheets dated 22.08.2017, 04.09.2017 and 18.09.2017 of the trial Court. It appears that the complainant is not turning up despite service of warrant.

5. Considering the fact that the complainant is not turning up in spite of service of warrant and further looking to the period of custody of the applicant as he is stated to be in jail since 10.10.2016 as also the fact that one of the co-accused has been enlarged on bail by this Court, I am inclined to release the applicant, at this stage.

6. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance.

C.c. today.

Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE Rao