Single judge rejected the applicant's anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in an FIR involving insult to modesty, obscene messages, and IT Act offences, relying on the prosecution statements.
Anticipatory bail application rejected.
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.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
MCRCA No. 484 of 2022
Order reserved on 08.07.2022
Order pronounced on 15.07.2022
Versus
For the Applicant/s :- Mr. R.S. Baghel, Advocate For the State :- Ms. Shivali Dubey, PL
C.A.V Order
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
messages and because of this act of the applicant, the marriage of the victim to her fance was cancelled and therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.
is Rejected.
Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge
Pawan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail in an offence punishable under Sections 507, 509(B) of the IPC and Section 67 of the IT Act.
Whether the truthful statements of the prosecutrix regarding death threats and intrusion into modesty justify rejection of the bail application.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Dr. Yogesh Kumar Sahu
State Of Chhattisgarh
Sachin Singh Rajput
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
