Allowed

Atul Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Sept 2017MCRC/5706/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a third bail application, the Chhattisgarh High Court granted regular bail to the applicant, a non-bailable offender charged with forgery and cheating, noting that a co-accused in a nearly similar case had been enlarged on bail.

What did the court decide?

The application was allowed and the applicant was directed to be released on bail on executing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety.

Atul Sharma Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 5706 of 2017

¶5

Atul Sharma S/o Shri Yogendra Sharma Aged About 34 Years R/o Kailashnagar, Housing Board, E W S 168, Jamul Tahsil & District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

----applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Purani Bhilai, Civil & Revenue District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Shri Sumit Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent-State : Shri Anupam Dubey, Dy. GA for the State

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

21/09/2017

¶14

This is the third bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 11.04.2016 in connection with Crime No.192/2016 registered at Police Station- Purani Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 472/34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶15

As per the prosecution case, the applicant along-with the other co-accused used to prepare the forged driving licence, fitness certificate and registration of the vehicle so as to allow it to cross the border and from the possession of this applicant forged seals of different States were recovered.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in jail since 11.04.2016, and even after rejection of the second bail application, no considerable progress in the trial has taken place and the co-accused

¶17

¶18

Pankaj Kumar Sao has been enlarged on bail in M.Cr.C. No.4778/2017 and the case of the present applicant is similar with Pankaj Kumar Sao, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for the similar relief, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶19

Learned State counsel is not able to dispute the fact that the case of the present applicant is similar with Pankaj Kumar Sao.

¶20

Considering the fact that case of the present applicant is similar with the coaccused Pankaj Kumar Sao, who has been granted bail and the detention of the applicant as he is in jail since 11.04.2016, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said Court.

Sd/-

Goutam Bhaduri

Judge

Ashu

Atul Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Sharma 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagirathi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt.a.jayalaxmi Vs a.venkteshwar Rao @ Balaji

Smt. a. Jayalaxmi and Anr. Vs a. Venkteshwar Rao @ Balaji

Shyamlal Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt.laxmi Shukla Vs Smt.yasoda Gupta

Shahzade Ahmad Vs Gulam Murtuza