Allowed

Kishore Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC2 Jan 2018MCRC/7114/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed multiple bail applications filed by accused persons in cases u/s 3, 4, and 5 of the PITA Act. Finding that investigation was complete and further detention unnecessary, the court granted bail on standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicants granted regular bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one local surety each.

Kishore Kumar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2018)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 6949 of 2017

¶4

1. Rajesh Kelzare (wrongly mention as Kelsar) S/o Gangadhar Kelzare, Aged About 53 Years, R/o P.W.S. Collony, Ward No.5, Bramhani, Nagpur (Maharashtra)

¶5

Nilkanth S/o Madhukar Tandekar, Aged About 32 Years, R/o P.W.S. Collony, Ward No.5, Bramhani, Nagpur (Maharashtra)

¶6

Kishor Kumar S/o Suryabhan Singh Gayakwad, Aged About 31 Years, R/o P.W.S. Collony, Ward No.5, Bramhani, Nagpur (Maharashtra) ---- Applicants

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant

¶9

And

¶10

MCRC No. 7024 Of 2017

¶11

Sonarin Bai W/o Sondas Kurre, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Nayapara, Gandai, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

¶12

Seemabharti W/o Dinesh Bharti, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Bhaji Dongri, Police Station Salhewara, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Applicants

¶13

¶14

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant

¶15

And

¶16

MCRC No. 7345 Of 2017

¶17

Laxman Thakur S/o Raju Thakur, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Ward No. 41, Sagar Nagar, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶18

Pramod Dhimar S/o Dharam Dhimar, Aged About 19 Years, R/o Ward No. 41, Sagar Nagar, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicants

¶19

¶20

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant

¶21

And

¶22

MCRC No. 7114 Of 2017

¶23

Kishore Kumar S/o Anuj Kumar Khandele Aged About 19 Years, R/o Ward No. 2, Kawardha, P. S. Kotwali, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh

¶24

-2-

¶25

---- Applicant Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant And MCRC No. 7160 Of 2017
1. Bisan Bai W/o Kanuk Satnami, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Nayapara, Gandai, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
2. Phoolbatiya Bai, W/o Punaram Kurre, Aged About 39 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Nayapara, Gandai, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
3. Anjana Madaiya, W/o Utra Madaiya, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Nayapara, Gandai, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
4. Vijay S/o Shatruhan Chauhan, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Devrikhurd, Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicants Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandai, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant And MCRC No. 7026 Of 2017
1. Lavkush Burman S/o Ashok Burman, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Ward No. 8, Dhaud, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant And MCRC No. 7046 Of 2017
1. Smt. Sandhya Satnami W/o Sanjay Satnami, Aged About 23 Years, R/o New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant And MCRC No. 7162 Of 2017

¶26

-3-

¶27

1. Santoshi D/o Budhram Satnami, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ward No. 15, Nawapara, Gandai, Police Station Gandai, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant And MCRC No. 7155 Of 2017
1. Itwari S/o Birjhu Satnami, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Nawapara, Gandai, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant And MCRC No. 7278 Of 2017
1. Raghuvir Sahu S/o Mukhiram Sahu, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Ward No. 18 Shaki Nagar Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant And MCRC No. 7198 Of 2017
1. Mohit Jhariya S/o Lala @ Uttam Jhariya, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Ward No.1, Pandariya, Gandai, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant Vs
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gandai, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Non-applicant And MCRC No. 7281 Of 2017
1. Smt. Sarita Bai Jendra W/o Devcharan Jendra, Aged About 38 Years, R/o New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Smt. Laxmi Mirche W/o Salim Mirche, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Kumhari, P.S. Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicants

¶28

-4-

¶29

¶30

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The District Magistrate, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

¶31

---- Non-applicant

¶32

For Applicant(s) –Shri Rakesh Pandey, Advocate (in MCRC No.6949/2017, MCRC No.7046/2017, MCRC No.7278/2017 and MCRC No.7281/23017),

¶33

Shri Abhishek Sharma, Advocate (in MCRC No.7024/2017, MCRC No.7160/2017 and MCRC No.7198/2017), Shri C.K.Sahu, Advocate (in MCRC No.7114/2017 and MCRC No.7026/2017),

¶34

Shri Krishna Kumar Dewangan, Advocate (in MCRC No.7345/2017),

¶35

Shri Tarendra Kumar Jha and Shri Ganesh Burman, Advocates (in MCRC No.7162/2017 and MCRC No.7155/2017).

¶36

For Non-applicant/State – Shri Aditya Sharma, Panel Lawyer.

¶37

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant

¶38

Order on Board

¶39

02-01-2018

¶40

As all these cases are of similar nature, registered under Section 3, 4 and 5 of Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act (in short 'PITA Act') in Crime No. 267 and 268 of 2017 at P.S. Gandai, District Rajnandgaon, C.G., these all applications are being decided by this common order.

¶41

Heard on the applications filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. These are first bail application before this Court by the applicants for regular bail.

¶42

It is submitted on behalf of the applicants in MCRC No.6949/2017, MCRC No.7345/2017, MCRC No.7114/2017, MCRC No.7160/2017, MCRC No.7026/2017, MCRC No.7046/2017, MCRC No.7162/2017, MCRC No.7278/2017, MCRC No.7198/2017 and MCRC No.7281/2017 that the applicants have been falsely implicated in these cases. All the applicants in these cases have been arrested on 24-10-2017 and are continuously in detention till date. It is further submitted that coordinate Bench of this Court has granted bail to one of the co-accused persons in these cases and in other similar cases also the coordinate Bench has granted bail to the applicants. Reliance has been placed in the order passed by the coordinate Bench in

¶43

-5-

¶44

MCRC No.7150/2017 dated 12-12-2017 and in MCRC No.2398/2017 vide order dated 13-06-2017. It is prayed that the applicants are ready to abide by all the conditions imposed for granting bail to them. Charge sheet has been filed in both the crime numbers. On these grounds, it is prayed that the applicants may be granted regular bail.

¶45

4 . Learned counsel for the applicants in MCRC No.7024/2017 and MCRC No.7155/2017 submit that these applicants have been falsely implicated without there being any evidence against them. The co-accused person in Crime No.268/2017 has been benefited with grant of bail. The applicants in these cases have similar case. Hence, it is prayed that these applicants may also be granted regular bail.

¶46

5 . Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the applications and submissions made in this respect. It is submitted that the cases registered against all these applicants are of serious nature in which minimum sentence is prescribed for each of the offence committed and the offence committed by these applicants is against morality and well being of society. Hence, for these reasons, the applicants are not entitled for grant of regular bail.

¶47

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶48

As per the case, on secret information received police personnel of Police Station Gandai, Distt. Rajnandgaon conducted a raid by sending two police personnel as customer to the house of Itwari Kurrey, the applicant in MCRC No.7155/2017. After confirmation that flesh trade is going on in the place of incident, arrest of the applicants, the customers and brothel keepers and other persons involved in the act of the prostitution were made. Two separate cases under Section 3, 4 and 5 of the PITA Act were registered. As submitted, investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed.

¶49

Considered on the submissions made and the contents of the case

¶50

-6-

¶51

diary. Looking to this fact that detention of the applicants for the purposes of investigation is no longer required and the trial of the case is likely to take some time before its conclusion and stringent condition can be imposed for appearance of the applicants before the trial Court, for these reasons, all the applications are allowed.

¶52

Consequently, all these applications filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. by the applicants are hereby 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/- with one local surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, for their appearance as and when directed.

¶53

Certified copy as per rules.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

¶56

Aadil

Kishore Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishore Kumar 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

Bhuri Bai Vs Amrit Lal Since Died Through His Lrs

Golu @ Karan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Devesh @ Divesh Kumar Bajaj Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Sunil Rai Yadav @ Sunil Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Kelzare and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Sonarin Bai and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh