Allowed

Neeraj Kumar Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Mar 2023MCRC/1126/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the applicant's second bail application under Section 439 CrPC. Relying on the fact that prosecution witnesses did not support the prosecution case and the detention period, the Court released the applicant on bail subject to a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on executing a personal bond for Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount to the trial Court.

Neeraj Kumar Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 1126 of 2023

¶5

Neeraj Kumar Sharma, S/o Suresh Sharma, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ramnagar, Police Station Kawardha, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Applicnat

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kawardha, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant For Respondent

¶11

: Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate : Mr. Sanjeev K. Agrawal, P.L.

¶12

Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

17/03/2023

¶15

The applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.618/2022, registered at Police Station – Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 364(A), 365, 342, 384, 394, 34 of IPC.

¶16

The allegation against the present applicant is that on 11.05.2022, when Deepak, son of complainant, along with his two friends Aman and Jai were going to Sarodha Dam in vehicle bearing registration No.MP-50-C-9752, they were kidnapped by the applicant, wrongfully confined them and made a call to complainant to extort money and also committed robbery. Based on this, offence has been registered. The present applicant has been taken into custody on 28.08.2022.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that after rejection of first bail application, complainant Bisanlal Sahu (PW/ 1), victim Jai Kumar Markam (PW/2) and Deepak Kumar Sandilya (PW/3) have been examined before the learned trial Court, who have not stated anything specific against the applicant and not supported the case of the prosecution. He also stated that according to the

¶18

¶19

evidence of complainant, the accident of his vehicle had taken place in which the car of opposite party got damaged and they were demanding Rs.75,000/-, however, they arrived at settlement to the tune of Rs.35,000/- at the police station for the damaged caused to the vehicle of opposite party. He also submits that the applicant is in custody since 28.08.2022 and, therefore, considering the detention period as also statement of the witnesses, the applicant may be extended privilege of regular bail.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶22

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the evidence of complainant Bisanlal Sahu (PW/1), victim Jai Kumar Markam (PW/2) and Deepak Kumar Sandilya (PW/3), who have not supported the case of the prosecution, detention period of the applicant, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶23

¶24

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶25

It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

¶26

Certified copy, as per rules.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶29

pkd

Neeraj Kumar Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Kumar 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

Kamal Kurrey Vs Trilochan Singh

Dipendra Kumar Naag Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ghansidas Tandan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raja Gavaskar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hanuman Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh