Allowed

Srikant Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Aug 2019MCRC/4436/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of a first bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. involving offences under IPC and POCSO. The court granted bail conditioned on furnishing a solvent surety and personal bond with an undertaking to appear for trial.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail upon furnishing one solvent surety of Rs. 25,000/- and a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with undertaking to appear and cooperate.

Srikant Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 4436 of 2019

¶5

Srikant Tiwari S/o Shri Rajmani Tiwari Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Manigawa, Police Station-Manigawa, District-Riwa,( Madhya Pradesh)

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kabirnagar, Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Non Applicant

¶10

For the Applicant : Mr. Sunil Pillai, Advocate For Non Applicant : Mr. Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

08.08.2019

¶14

This is first bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the applicant before this Court and no other bail application is pending before any other Court.

¶15

Perused the case diary provided by the learned counsel for the State in connection with Crime No. 128/2019 registered at Police StationKabir Nagar, Raipur, Civil and Revenue District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 366(a), 376(a), 376, 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, & Section 3, 4 of POCSO Act.

¶16

Case of the prosecution, in brief is that co-accused Mukku Verma was trapping the girls in love affair. Co-accused Mukku Verma, Asha Verma, Payal Sahu, Amarjeet Kaur, Gouri Yadav were operating the sex racket.

¶17

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has no criminal background, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application, however, submits that there is no criminal antecedent against the applicant in police case diary.

¶20

As per the call details and cyber report, applicant had phoned to coaccused Asha Verma.

¶21

The Special Judge(POCSO), Raipur did not consider as to what legally admissible evidence is available against the applicant.

¶22

Looking to the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the fact that there is no likelihood of the accused to abscond and tamper the evidence, it is directed that if applicant furnishes one solvent surety for a sum of Rs.25,000/- along with a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned Court with the condition that he will appear before the trial Court at 11:00 am as and when directed till trial and he would cooperate during the trial, he be released on bail.

¶23

Certified copy as per rules.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

(Sharad Kumar Gupta) Judge

¶26

Srikant Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srikant Tiwari 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

Pooja Sound and Light Decoration Vs Ghanshyam Prasad Dani

Pooja Sound and Light Decoration Vs Ghanshyam Prasad Dani

Pooja Sound and Light Decotation Vs Ghanshyam Prasad Dani

Jagannath Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kishore Kumar Rawlani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Kiran Anand Vs State of Chhattisgrh