Allowed

Radhika Bai Gaukar @ Munnibai Gaukar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC20 Nov 2017MCRC/4670/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur disposed of three bail applications filed by individuals charged with offences under IPC Sections 420, 467, 468, 120, and 120-B. The Court granted bail, noting that investigation was complete and the Applicants were not likely to tamper with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Each applicant shall be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

Radhika Bai Gaukar @ Munnibai Gaukar Vs State Of… — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 4092 of 2017

¶4

Sondas Barman S/o Suklal Barman Aged About 35 Years R/o VillageJurilakhurd, Police Station- Kotwali, Civil & Revenue District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through: Station House Officer, Police StationKotwali, Civil & Revenue District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh, Police Station Wrongly Mentioned Rajnandgaon

¶8

---- Respondent

¶9

And

¶10

MCRC No. 4670 Of 2017

¶11

Radhika Bai Gaukar @ Munnibai Gaukar W/o Late Paklu Ram Aged About 52 Years R/o Sonesarar Ward No.14 Thana/tahsil Khairagarh District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶12

---- Applicant

¶13

¶14

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Kotwali District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶15

---- Respondent

¶16

And

¶17

MCRC No. 5965 Of 2017

¶18

Dilip Kumar S/o Feru Satnami, Aged About 51 Years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Jurla Khurd, P.S. And Tahsil Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

¶19

---- Applicant

¶20

¶21

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

¶22

---- Respondent

¶23

Shri T.K.Jha, Shri Rakesh Thakur and Shri Sameer Singh counsel for respective applicants.

¶24

Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate for the State.

¶25

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava

Order On Board

20/11/2017

Heard.

The applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No.175/2017 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, Civil & Revenue District - Rajnandgaon (CG) for alleged commission of offences under Section 420, 467, 468 and 120 of IPC against Sondas Barman and Dilip Kumar and under Section 420, 467, 468, 120-B, 419, 471/34 of IPC against Radhika Bai Gaukar.

¶30

Case of the prosecution is that the property belonging jointly to Dilip Kumar and his sister Man Bai was sold by Dilip impersonating Radhika Bai as Man Bai.

¶31

Learned counsel for the applicants submit that as far as Sondas Barman is concerned, his case is similar to that of co- accused – Raju Bokade, who has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No.2269/2017. As far as other two applicants are concerned, it is submitted that investigation is complete, charge sheet has been filed and the applicants are not likely to abscond or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Therefore, they may be granted bail.

¶32

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes bail application and submits that the manner in which the property was sold, a prima facie case is made out and if they are granted bail, they may tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶33

Taking into consideration the submission of learned counsel for the parties, particularly taking into consideration that co-accused – Raju Bokade has been granted bail by this Court and that the case of Sondas appears to be similar to that of Raju Bokade, further considering that investigation is complete, charge sheet has been filed and Radhika Bai and Dilip Kumar do not appear to tamper with prosecution witnesses nor likely to abscond, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants.

¶34

Accordingly, all the applications are allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- along with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. They shall appear before the Trial Court regularly on each and every date, unless exempted from appearance.

¶35

Certified copy as per rules.

¶36

Sd/- ( Manindra Mohan Shrivastava ) Judge

¶37

Deepti

Radhika Bai Gaukar @ Munnibai Gaukar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhika Bai Gaukar @ Munnibai Gaukar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ghanaram Verma Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh

Paramjeet Banjare @ Derhu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Harihar Prasad Sidar Vs Shri Alok Kumar Shrivastav

Virendra Singh and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Sharda Borikar and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Neha Choudhary Vs State Of Chhattisgarh