Nandkishor Jaiswal @ Nandu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Jun 2022MCRC/1678/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by a senior citizen arrested for theft on a running train. The court held that given the grave nature of the allegation and the applicant being a habitual offender, bail could not be granted, leaving the matter open for reconsideration after examining seizure witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; liberty granted to revive prayer after examination of seizure witnesses.

Nandkishor Jaiswal @ Nandu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1678 of 2022

¶5

Nandkishor Jaiswal @ Nandu S/o Shri Devkilal Jaiswal Aged About 65 Years R/o Khusrupur, P.S. Khusrupur, Civil And Revenue District Patna, Bihar.

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. G.R.P. Raigarh, Civil And Revenue District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Non-Applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Shri Harshal Chouhan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Smt. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

17/06/2022 :

¶14

The applicant has preferred this application for grant of bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.07/2021 registered in Police Station GRP, Raigarh for offence under Section 379/34 of the IPC.

¶15

Allegation against the present applicant is that he along with co-accused persons was found to be involved in committing theft in the running train. During investigation, certain stolen articles were recovered from the possession of the applicant and other co-accused persons. Therefore, the aforesaid offence has been registered.

¶16

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. He is a senior citizen aged about 65 years. He is in jail since 24.12.2021, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶18

On the other hand, learned State Counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that the applicant is a habitual offender. Considering the gravity of offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.

¶19

Considering the submissions, nature of allegation that the applicant is involved in committing theft in the running train, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the Application is rejected. However, the applicant would be at liberty to revive his prayer after examination of seizure witnesses.

¶20

Sd/(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶21

Barve

Nandkishor Jaiswal @ Nandu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nandkishor Jaiswal @ Nandu 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

Rajkumar Chouhan @ Chhotu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Khorbahara @ Mahettaru Singh Rajput Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohammad Washim Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kalapdhari Murum Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gulshan Ram @ Budeh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lokesh Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh