Dismissed

Satish Nayak v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Aug 2015MCRCA/676/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order rejects an application for anticipatory bail. The court refused relief because the case diary contained specific allegations of demolishing a hut and stealing belongings, leading the single judge to conclude the benefit of anticipatory bail was not warranted. The bail application was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The bail application of the applicant is rejected. No anticipatory bail is extended.

Satish Nayak Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Anticipatory Bail | Chhattisgarh HC (2015)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRCA No. 676 of 2015

¶4

Satish Nayak S/o Late Hariram Nayak Aged About 45 years R/o Village- Bartoli, Police Station- City Kotwali Jashpur, Tahsil & District- Jashpur, Pin- 496331

¶5

---- Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through: Police Station- City Kotwali, Jashpur, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh, Pin- 496331

¶8

			---- Respondent
For Applicant	-	Mr. Sudeep Verma, Advocate
For Respondent/State	-	Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer

Order On Board

05/08/2015

Heard.

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.84/2014 registered at police station – City Kotwali, Jashpur, District-Jashpur for alleged commission of offence under Section 427, 379, 506-B,34 of IPC.

¶13

Prosecution case is that the applicant and other accused demolished the temporary hut in between the complainant living and all their belongings were stolen.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations are false and after thought, no such incident happened nor the applicant has taken away nothing.

¶15

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Perusal of case diary shows that specific allegation of the applicant involved in demolishing the temporary hut and taking away the belongings of the complainant had been made, therefore, I am not inclined to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶17

The bail application is rejected.

¶18

Sd/Manindra Mohan Shrivastava J U D G E

¶19

Rekha

Satish Nayak v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Nayak v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vyash Chand Agrawal Vs Amit Agrawal And Ors.

Nirmal Das Vaishnav and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mohammad Imran Kadari Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Kumar Dey Vs Neeraj Basod

Pramshankar Devangan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Durpat Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh