The High Court at Bilaspur rejected the anticipatory bail application. After perusing the victim statement and case diary, the court found a strong case for custodial interrogation and held that anticipatory bail was not warranted.
The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
M.Cr.C.(A) No. 581 /2016
Rameshwar @ Ramesh, S/o. Bagasram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o. Keslikhurd, Police Station - Kunda, Tahsil - Pandaria, Civil & Revenue District – Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate, Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Yogeshwar Sharma, Advocate.
For Respondent : Mr. Anant Bajpai, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board
03/08/2016
a case where the benefit of Section 438 can be extended to the applicant, therefore, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant, as perusal of the case diary would indicate that it is not a case wherein it can be assumed that custodial interrogation may not be required.
Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge
Ashok
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant apprehending arrest in a criminal case involving rape and criminal breach of peace.
Whether the perusal of the victim statement and case diary indicates a necessity for custodial interrogation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rameshwar @ Ramesh
State Of Chhattisgarh
Goutam Bhaduri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
