Allowed

Dharmveer Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC12 Jul 2022MCRCA/268/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by the accused apprehending arrest in a case of intent to outrage modesty. The Court noted a conflict in FIRs between the applicant and the prosecutrix's brother-in-law, creating doubt about false implication, and granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed with a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and one surety on four specific conditions.

Dharmveer Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Anticipatory Bail | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.Cr.C.(A) No. 268 of 2022

¶5

Dharmveer Sharma S/o Late Vijay Kumar Sharma, Aged about 36 years, R/o Ward No. 07, Koriya Colliery Chirmiri, P.S.-Chirmiri, District Koriya (C.G.)

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S.- Chirmiri, District Koriya (C.G.)

¶9

---- State/Non-Applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Shri Jai Prakash Shukla, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Shri R.M. Solapurkar, Government Advocate

¶11

Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order on Board

¶12

12.07.2022

¶13

Heard.

¶14

Applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 56/2022, registered at Police Station – Chirmiri, District Koriya (C.G.) for the offfence punishable under Sections 354 & 456 of IPC.

¶15

Prosecution case is that on 28.01.2022 when the prosecutrix was alone in her house alongwith her 7 years child namely Akash, the present applicant knocked the door at about 09:00 pm, on which she opened the door and the applicant came inside her house. On being asked water by the applicant, the prosecutrix was giving water to him, suddenly he with an intent to outrage her modesty, started dragging her left arm and started pressing her both the arm, resulting which the cloth of the prosecutrix torn. When the prosecutrix shouted, her brother-in-law ( devar ) came there and intervened, the applicant pushed her devar and ran away from there. Hence, on report being lodged to the above effect, the aforesaid offences

¶16

¶17

have been registered against the applicant.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the then Superintendent of the Police of Koriya District had launched scheme namely 'Nijat Progam' aiming to free the area from narcotics drugs in which the applicant is informer of the police. In this scheme, the applicant informed the police that brother-in-law of the prosecutrix was running illicit liquor trade and on account of this, brother-in-law of the prosecutrix assaulted the applicant. He submits that the applicant has lodged a report against the brother-in-law of the prosecutrix which was registered as Crime No. 55/2022 in Police Station Chirmiri under Sections 294, 323 & 506 of IPC, a copy of F.I.R. filed as Annexure- A/2 in the present bail application. He also submits that as counter blast of that report, brother-in-law of the prosecutrix insisted the prosecutrix to lodge the report against the applicant. He further submits that the applicant has also made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police intimating that he has been falsely implicated in the present case, a copy complaint filed as Annexure-A/3 in the present bail application. He submits that the applicant and the complainant are residents of the same locality and if the applicant may be granted benefit of Section 438 Cr.P.C., he is ready to abide all the conditions imposed by this Court.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that there are three criminal antecedents of the applicant which were registered in the year 2014, 2010 & 2004. He submits that though the report was lodged by the applicant against the brother-in-law of the prosecutrix prior to report lodged by the prosecutrix, but on the basis of previous criminal antecedents of the applicant and he entered the house of the prosecutrix with an intent to outrage her modesty, he may not be extended benefit of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

¶20

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶21

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, rival

¶22

¶23

submissions made by the parties, looking to the situation of the case, the applicant first lodged the report against the brother-in-law of the prosecutrix, thereafter, the prosecutrix lodged report against the present applicant in the same police station, which creates a doubt for false implication of the applicant in this case, conclusion of the trial may take some time, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that benefit Section 438 Cr.P.C. can be extended to the applicant.

¶24

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer subject to the following terms and conditions:-

¶25

i. he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court or Investigating Officer, as the case may be.

¶26

ii. he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial,

¶27

iii. he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required, and

¶28

iv. he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

¶31

vatti

Dharmveer Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmveer Sharma 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

Santosh Pal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ravi Shankar Sagar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jitendra Singh Rajput Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Shanti Devi @ Shukhamain and Another Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shobhit Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Amit Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh