Allowed

Madan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Aug 2022MCRCA/584/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh granted anticipatory bail to a 19-year-old accused in a theft case, noting lack of seized evidence and prior bail grants in related cases, subject to standard conditions regarding interference with witnesses and cooperation with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail on personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety for like sum.

Madan Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Anticipatory Bail | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRCA No. 584 of 2022

¶4

Madan Yadav S/o Amar Yadav Aged About 19 Years Caste Mahkul, R/o Village Bankombo, Police Station Narayanpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent

¶7

For the Applicant/s :- Mrs. Indira Tripathi, Advocate For the State :- Ms. Shivali Dubey, PL

¶8

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput,

¶9

Order on Board

¶10

03.08.2022

¶11

This frst anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been fled by the accused/applicant who is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 206/2021 registered at Police Station Bagicha District Jashpur, CG for the ofence punishable under Sections 457, 380 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶12

Case of the prosecution in brief is that a report has been lodged for stolen from Marol Higher Secondary School the articles computer, printer, Machine amounting of Rs. 51,250/-. As per memorandum statements of accused Hemraj, Dinesh Ram, Basant Ram, Jagdish Yadav, Satish Kumar from accused Satish Kumar and Basant Ram Yadav one monitor, one keyboard, one printer, one mouse, one motorcycle passion pro (without number), one printer, one UPS, one CPU, one keyboard, one monitor, one mouse which is relates to Crime Nos. 210/2021,

¶13

60/2021 and 77/2021 it shows that the involvement in more than one crime of stolen.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that is innocent and has been implicated in this case only on the basis of memorandum statements of other accused persons; nothing has been seized from the house of the applicant. It is further submitted that only on the basis of memorandum statements of four accused persons, fve cases have been registered against them and the applicant has also been implicated in all fve cases. If the applicant had taken any articles to his house, then police could seize such articles from his house, but nothing has been done in this regard. She submits that out of fve cases in two cases applicant was granted bail vide orders dated 28.07.2022 in MCRCA Nos. 583 of 2022 and 615 of 2022 by the co-ordinate Bench, there is no other criminal antecedents have been reported against the present applicant, who is aged about 19 years young boy. He lastly submits that the applicant shall abide by all the terms and conditions which may be imposed on them while granting bail, therefore, he may be given the beneft of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned State counsel opposes the application for anticipatory bail and submits that the applicant has actively participated in the commission of instant crime as well as other four crimes, hence, he may not be given the beneft of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering the fact that if it was disclosed that some stolen articles have been taken by the applicant, despite that,

¶17

police has neither searched his house nor seized any such articles; the applicant is young boy of 19 years and allegedly fve cases have been registered against him and other accused persons on the basis of memorandum statements of co-accused person. Applicant has been extended beneft of anticipatory bail in MCRCA Nos. 583 of 2022 and 615 of 2022. Hence, considering the entirety of the case, this Court fnds it to be a ft case for grant of anticipatory bail to him. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting ofcer, on the following conditions:-

¶18

(a) 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 from disclosing such fact to the Court or to any police officer,

¶19

(b) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and

¶20

¶21

(d) he shall appear before the concerned Police Officer/Investigating Officer on 29.08.2022 and cooperate the investigation.

¶22

The observations made hereinabove is only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and the trial will decide the case on its own merit without being infuenced by any observation made hereinabove. It is made clear that if any of the aforesaid conditions is violated by the applicant, the State would be free to move for cancellation of bail.

¶23

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

¶24

Pawan

Madan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madan Yadav 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

Ravi Kumar Harijan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Brishdhvaj Saraf Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Bharia Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Madan Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Madan Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Keshav Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh