Dismissed

Nepal Pal @ Umesh Gond v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC1 Apr 2016MCRC/2058/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court order rejects the applicant's third bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. after dismissing the first application as withdrawn and the second on merits. The court notes incomplete examination of prosecution witnesses and remands it to the trial court to expedite the trial and explain the delay in compliance with a previous order.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial court directed to expedite trial and explain delay in complying with previous order.

Nepal Pal @ Umesh Gond Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No.2058 of 2016

¶5

Nepal Pal @ Umesh Gond, S/o Shri Sardar Pal, aged about 45 years, R/o Bagra, Police Station Ramanujnagar, District Balrampur, presently residing at Pandavpara Police Station Patna, Tahsil Baikunthpur, Civil and Revenue District Korea, District Korea (CG).

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer, Police Station Patna, District Korea (CG).

¶9

---- Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Shri Anil Gulati, Advocate For Non-applicant: Shri Dilman Rati Minj, Dy.G.A.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board

¶12

01/04/2016

¶13

(1) Heard.

¶14

(2) This is the third bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.125/2014 registered at Police Station Patna, District Korea, for the offence punishable under Sections 417, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(3) The applicant's first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn by order of this Court dated 19.2.2015 passed in

¶16

¶17

M.Cr.C. No.791/2015 and second bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits by order of this Court dated 20.11.2015 passed in M.Cr.C. No.4441/2015.

¶18

(4) In the present case, out of 24 charge-sheet listed witnesses, only 20 prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial Court and 04 prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined.

¶19

(5) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any good ground to entertain the third bail application. Consequently, the third bail application is rejected. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously as directed earlier by order of this Court dated 20.11.2015 without any further delay.

¶20

(6) The trial Court is directed to submit explanation as to why the order of this Court dated 20.11.2015 passed in M.Cr.C. No.4441/2015 has not been complied with within two weeks.

¶21

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶22

L/-

Nepal Pal @ Umesh Gond v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nepal Pal @ Umesh Gond 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neeraj Kumar Tandon Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ravishankar Jogi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ballu @ Balram Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Gopal Chandrakar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Laxmi Prasad Sahu Vs The Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited

Dharam Lal Banjare Vs State Of Chhattisgarh