High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/6824/2019allowed

Mukesh Kumar @ Nanku & ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-12-10Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 6824 of 2019

1. Mukesh Kumar @ Nanku S/o Rajendra Prasad Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Jatpari Khurd, P. S. Jarhagaon, P. S. Mungeli, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

2. Hitesh @ Hittu S/o Rajendra Prasad Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Jatpari Khurd, P. S. Jarhagaon, P. S. Mungeli, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

3. Rajesh Kumar @ Nanu Sahu S/o Darbari Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Jatpari Khurd, P. S. Jarhagaon, P. S. Mungeli, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mungeli, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Applicants :

Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Ms. Reena Singh, PL Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 10/12/2019 • The accused/applicants have moved this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 418/2019 registered at Police Station - Lormi, District Mungeli (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 392/34 of IPC.

• The prosecution story in brief is that, on 27.09.2019, complainant lodged a report alleging that on 19.09.2019 at about 10.30 PM he was traveling with his relative and when they reached near Bhaisasur Temple at village Masni, four unknown persons stopped their vehicle and greathearted to kill them and committed loot of Rs. 2,900/- and one Vivo

company Mobile from the present applicant and one Micromax mobile from his relative namely Ajesh Yadav. Thereafter, they ran away from the place of incident. On the basis of that, after investigation, offence has been registered against the applicants and they have been arrested. • Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the charge-sheet has been filed and there are no previous antecedents against the applicants. He next submits that the applicants are in jail since 27.09.2019, therefore, the applicants may be released on bail.

• On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

• I have heard learned counsel for the parties. • Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the fact that applicants are in jail since 27.09.2019 and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

• Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on their executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each, with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the said Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Vijay Sahu