The High Court dismissed a bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC. Rejecting the claim of false implication, the Court noted the seizure of the stolen iPad and the applicant's 17 pending offences, deeming these insufficient grounds for bail.
Bail application dismissed.
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.
Page 1 of 3
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRC No. 158 of 2021
---- Applicant
Versus
--Non-Applicant
| For Applicant | : Shri Syed I. Ali, Advocate on behalf of |
|---|---|
| Shri Devarshi Thakur, Advocate | |
| For Non-Applicant/State | : Shri Dinesh Tiwari, Dy. G.A. |
Hon'ble Justice Shri Gautam Chourdiya Order on Board
12/02/2021
Page 2 of 3
admitted vide order dated 13.1.2021, it has been listed by the Registry for final hearing today.
Page 3 of 3
under the various Sections of the IPC i.e. Section 294, 506, 323 of the IPC, Section 34(2) of the Excise Act and Section 25 of the Arms Act, and the other material collected by the prosecution, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.
(Gautam Chourdiya) Judge
sunita
2 issues framed by the court
Whether regular bail should be granted to the applicant who has been arrested for theft and has 17 pending offences against his name.
Whether the seizure of stolen property from the applicant's possession warrants rejection of bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shiva Netam
State Of Chhattisgarh
Gautam Chourdiya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
