Allowed

Chhotu @ Ankit Dhruv v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Apr 2018MCRC/1137/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the bail application of an applicant arrested for robbery and culpable homicide. The court held that with no material identification evidence and due to the duration of custody, the applicant was entitled to regular bail on furnishing a bond.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

Chhotu @ Ankit Dhruv Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.Cr.C. No. 1137 of 2018

¶5

Chhotu @ Ankit Dhruv S/o Umendra Dhruv, Aged about 24 years, R/o Satya Nagar Ameri, Police Station Chakarbhata, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Police Station Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶9

		---- Non-applicant
For Applicant	:	Mr. Vivek Tripathi, counsel on behalf of Shri Malay Kumar Bhaduri, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State	:	Mr. Ashish Surana, P.L.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

¶11

Order On Board

¶12

17/04/18

¶13

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.384/2017 registered at Police Station Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 393,34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant and 2 other accused persons attempted to commit robbery and thereby committed the aforesaid offence.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in crime in

¶16

¶17

question, he has not been identified by the villagers, he is in jail since 24-11-2017 and charge-sheet has been filed, therefore, he may be released on regular bail.

¶18

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application.

¶19

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

¶20

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, further taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence, role of the applicant, no material evidence of identification available on record and the fact that the applicant is in custody since 24-11-2017, this Court is of the opinion that present is a fit case in which the applicant should be enlarged on regular bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for his appearance as and when directed.

¶22

Kvr

Chhotu @ Ankit Dhruv v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhotu @ Ankit Dhruv v. the 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

Manish Potai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Virendra Thakur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Shri Shyam Ispatindia and Anr. Vs Asst. Commiss. of Income Tax and Anr.

Manish Travels Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Arihant Agencies Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

M/S. Shiv Roadways and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.