← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/145/2020allowed

Yogendra Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-02-13Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8394 of 2019 • Gendram Sidar S/o Sudarshan Sidar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Keribandha, Police Station- Sakti, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House OfÏcer, Police Station- Sakti, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh., ---- Respondent And MCRC No. 145 of 2020 • Yogendra Patel S/o Tularam Patel Aged About 35 Years R/o Keribandha, Police Station Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., ---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For Respondent :

Shri V.K. Agrawal, P.L.

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 13/02/2020 1.

Since the aforesaid bail applications arise out of the same crime number, they are being disposed of together by this common order.

2.

The applicants have preferred these first bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with Crime No.288/2019, registered at Police Station - Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 394, 397, 307, 120-B, 34 IPC.

3.

Allegation against the applicants is that they along with other two co-accused persons looted Rs.2,28,500/- from complainant Kumar Sanu Sen and inflicted injury on his body with the help of iron rod. The incident was reported to the Police Station, Sakti. Based on this, offence has been registered. The present applicants have been taken into custody on 17.07.2019.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that no seizure of looted cash was made from the applicants. He also submits that the applicants are in custody since 17.07.2019, charge sheet has been filed and there is no likelihood of their case being decided in near future. Therefore, they may be released on bail.

5.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application.

6.

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

7.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, quality of evidence and further considering the fact that the applicants are in custody since 17.07.2019, charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicants on bail.

8.

Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed. 9.

It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each 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, till the final disposal of the trial. Certified copy, as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Pekde