← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/9321/2018allowed

Rajkumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-01-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 9321 of 2018 • Rajkumar, S/o Chain Singh, aged about 35 years, R/o Imliduggu, P.S. City Kotwali, District- Korba, Chhattigarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through : Station House Officer, Police Station - City Kotwali, District- Korba, (C.G.).

---- Respondent AND MCRC No. 9602 of 2018 • Khagesh Ratre, S/o Motichand, aged about 35 years, R/o Imliduggu, P.S.- City Kotwali, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through : Station House Officer, Police Station - City Kotwali, District- Korba, (C.G.).

---- Respondent __________________________________________________________________ For Applicants : Shri Rohit Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Shri UKS Chandel, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 14.01.2019

1. Heard.

2. Since both cases arise out of same Crime No., therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.

3. The Applicants have preferred their first bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in

connection with crime No. 620/2018, registered at Police Station - City Kotwali, District- Korba, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 394, 34 of the IPC.

4. As per the prosecution story, on 24.08.2018, Complainant Uday Paswan lodged a report against the present Applicants wherein it has been alleged that on 24.08.2018 at about 9:00 pm both the Applicants namely Rajkumar (in MCRC No. 9321/2018) and Khagesh Ratre (in MCRC No. 9602/2018), abused him and looted Rs. 6500/-, Aadhar card, driving licence from him. On the basis of the said report, offence has been registered against the Applicants. They have been taken into custody on 30.09.2018.

5. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants submits that the Applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the Applicants have no criminal antecedent, they are in custody since 30.09.2018 and trial will take some time. Charge-sheet has already been filed. Therefore, they may be released on bail.

6. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application.

7. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the evidence collected by the prosecution and further considering the fact that the Applicants have no criminal antecedent, they are in custody since 30.09.2018 and trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release them on bail.

9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

10. It is directed that the Applicants shall be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one

solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Prakash