Allowed

Ashutosh Bhattacharya v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC9 May 2019MCRC/689/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the first bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for an accused charged with rape and an atrocity offence. The order directed release on bail upon furnishing a surety and personal bond to the satisfaction of the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed upon furnishing one solvent surety for Rs. 25,000 and one personal bond of like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

Ashutosh Bhattacharya Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 689 of 2019

¶5

Ashutosh Bhattacharya, son of Subir Kumar Bhattacharya, aged about 21 years, R/o Tongpal, District Sukma (CG). ---- Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer, Police Station Sukma, District Sukma (CG). ---- Non-applicant

¶6

For Applicant : Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-applicant : Mr. Wasim Miyan, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board

¶7

09.05.2019

¶8

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.

¶9

Perused the case diary provided by the counsel for the State in connection with Crime No.15/2018 registered at Police Station Sukma, District Sukma for the offence punishable under Sections 376 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶10

Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 28.06.2018 prosecutrix was aged about 20 years old. She is a member of Scheduled Tribe. On 28.06.2018 at about 8:00pm she had gone to field to attend the natures call. At that time, the applicant reached there, pressed her mouth and committed forcibly sexual intercourse with her. Her husband saw her and applicant in suspicious condition, then scuffle took place between the applicant and prosecutrix's husband.

¶11

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence. He is an innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submitted that medical evidence does not support the prosecution case and there is a delay in lodging FIR of three days, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶12

On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application. However, he submits that there is no criminal antecedent is reported against the applicant in police case diary. 6. Looking to the above facts and circumstances of the case, the bail application is allowed. It is ordered that if the applicant furnishes one solvent surety for a sum of Rs.25,000/- along with one personal bond of the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned, he be released on bail.

¶13

Certified copy as per rules.

¶14

Sd/(Sharad Kumar Gupta) JUDGE

¶15

L/-

Ashutosh Bhattacharya v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashutosh Bhattacharya 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

Prakash Mallik Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Neeliofar Shiekh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanju Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Baisakhu Dhruv & Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivam Goswami Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chotu @ Afzal Ansari Vs State of Chhattisgarh