Tikeshwar Sahu & ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 7751 of 2019

1. Tikeshwar Sahu S/o Yogeshwar Sahu Aged About 22 Years R/o Kansinghi, Police Station Chura District Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh.

2. Gajendra S/o Palsingh Jagat Aged About 18 Years R/o Kansinghi, Police Station Chura District Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh.

3. Girdhari S/o Oklu Ram Aged About 21 Years R/o Kansinghi, Police Station Chura District Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh.

4. Tukeshwar S/o Dehra Ram Aged About 19 Years R/o Kansinghi, Police Station Chura District Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh.

5. Karan Dhruw S/o Jagdish Dhruw Aged About 20 Years R/o Kansinghi, Police Station Chura District Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Chura, District Gariyabandh Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent For Applicants :

Mr. Ajinesh Shukla, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Mr. Sameer Sharma, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 21.01.2020 • The accused/applicants have moved these first bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 100/2019 registered at Police Station -Chura, Gariyabandh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 354(d), (I)(IV), 354(x), 395, 294, 394, 323, 147, 509 of IPC & Section 12 of POCSO Act.

• The prosecution story in nutshell is that, complainant Satyadev Manikpuri lodged a compliant before concern police station alleging that applicants were bathing in the pond and dancing without cloths pointing out to the girls presenting in that area of the pond, while being objected by the

complainant, applicants started abusing him, committed marpeet with the complainant and snatched his mobile phone. Based on this, after completion of 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 applicants are in jail since 26.09.2019 and they are ready to furnish adequate surety and shall abide by all the directions and conditions imposed upon them by the Court, therefore, the present applicants may also be granted 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, detention period of the applicants and further considering the fact that 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. 25,000/- 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