Criminal court rejected a bail application under Section 439 CrPC for an applicant accused of snatching a mobile phone and 500 rupees while threatening to kill the victim, rejecting arguments of false implication due to the serious nature of the offence.
Bail application rejected; applicant not enlarged on bail.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
M.Cr.C. No. 3454 of 2018
Virendra Kumar Sahu, S/o Samay Lal Sahu, Aged About 31 Years, R/o- Camp-2, Santoshi Para, Near Janta School, Gali in front of the clinic, Durg, Tahsil & District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate, Durg, Chhattisgarh.
---- Non-Applicant
| For Applicant : Shri P. |
R. Patankar, Advocate. |
|---|---|
| For Non-Applicant/State : Shri V. |
B. Singh, P. L. |
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Agrawal
Order On Board
10.09.2018
2
3
mobile phone along with a sum of Rs. 500/- from the complainant with the aid of other accused persons, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. The application is accordingly rejected.
Sd/Sanjay Agrawal) Judge
Deepti Jha
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in an offence of snatching involving robbery under Sections 392 and 395 IPC.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Virendra Kumar Sahu
State of Chhattisgarh
Sanjay Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
