Dismissed

Gangaram and Anr. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC23 Nov 2017MCRC/5185/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge of the Chhattisgarh High Court rejected a bail application filed under Section 439 CrPRC for two applicants accused of possessing pamphlets and promoting a prohibited Naxalite organization under the Chhattisgarh Vishesh Jan Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2005, deeming the offence grave enough to deny bail.

What did the court decide?

Bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC is rejected; applicants are not entitled to grant of bail.

Gangaram and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Narcotics (NDPS) | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Misc. Criminal Case No.5185 of 2017

¶5

1. Gangaram S/o Pardeshi Ram Dhurve, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Bhujari, Police Station Bakarkatta, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶6

2. Naresh, S/o Chunuram Porte, Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Bhothili, Police Station Bakarkatta, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶7

---- Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Bakarkatta, Distt. Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh)

¶10

---- Respondent

¶11

For applicant For respondent/State

¶12

: Shri Samir Singh, Advocate : Shri Anil S Pandey, Govt. Advocate

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ram Prasanna Sharma

¶14

Order On Board

¶15

23.11.2017

¶16

1 . This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for grant of bail to the applicants who have been arrested on 23.5.2017 in connection with Crime No.05/2017, registered at Police Station Bakarkatta, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 8(3)(5) of the Chhattisgarh Vishesh Jan Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2005.

¶17

2 . As per the prosecution story, Communist Marxist organization which is popularly known as naxalites, is a prohibited organisation and the applicants are the members of the said organization and they were in possession of certain pamphlets and were encouraging disobedience to establish law and the government.

¶18

¶19

3 . Learned counsel for the applicants submits that though some pamphlets have been seized from the applicant, but they have not taken any active role in the activities of the prohibited organisation, therefore the applicants are entitled for the bail.

¶20

4 . On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicants are actively involved in the prohibited organization and as per the record, they have supplied certain material to the naxals and did certain activities against the police agency and in favour of the naxals

¶21

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

¶22

6 . Looking to the material collected against the applicants that they have actively participated in favour of a prohibited organization by distributing pamphlets for disobedience to establish law and the government. Looking to the gravity of the offence as the same is related to law and order of the State, the applicants are not entitled for grant of bail.

¶23

7 . Accordingly, bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC is hereby rejected.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

(Ram Prasanna Sharma)

¶26

JUDGE

¶27

Bini

Gangaram and Anr. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangaram and Anr. 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

Vinit Choubey Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Yusuf Ali Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Bhuru Khan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Santu Sahu Vs Sukhdev and Oth.

Bhuvneshwar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Panchuram Tandon Vs State Of Chhattisgarh