Allowed

Ghanshyam Choudhari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Jun 2023MCRCA/86/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order granting anticipatory bail to an applicant apprehending arrest in a disturbance case, based on illuminating investigation officer's statement placing applicant outside the state during the incident.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted executible upon issuance of personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety, subject to conditions of interrogation, non-influence of witnesses, and appearance in court.

Ghanshyam Choudhari Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

Page 1 of 2

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRCA No. 86 of 2023

¶5

Ghanshyam Choudhari, S/o Devicharan Choudhari, Aged about 40 Years, R/o Raja Talab, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Golbazar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

________________________________________________________ For Applicant : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Advocate. For State/ Respondent : Mr. Lalilt Jangade, Dy. GA with Mr. Yogesh Kumar Kashypa, SHO/Investigating Officer

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board

¶12

15/06/2023

¶13

This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for grant of anticipatory bail, who has apprehension of being arrested in connection with Crime No. 316/2022, registered at Police Station– Golbazar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 186,147,149,353,341 IPC.

¶14

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20.12.2022 without obtaining permission for protest, the member of Bajrang Party have assembled near Jay Stambh Chowk, Raipur for protest against the policy of State Government and for burning of effigy, due to which, the road was obstructed. It is further alleged that the police personnel tried to maintain the peace, but the members of Bajrang Party deterred the police personnel and other authority from discharge their duty, thereafter, the offence has been registered against the applicant.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that on the date of incident the application was out of State, still he was falsely implicated in the case and he was not the member who have made the protest on 20.12.2022, as such, no offence is made out agasint him, therefore, the he may be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Page 2 of 2

¶17

On the last date of hearing, SHO/Investigating Officer was directed to remain present before this Court explaining how the applicant was roped in the commission of crime.

¶18

Mr. Yogesh Kumar Kashypa, SHO/Investigating Officer appears and would submit that as per call details the applicant was out of State and was not the member of protest.

¶19

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

¶20

Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary.

¶21

Considering the statement of SHO/Investigating Officer, I am inclined to extend the benefit of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. to the applicant.

¶22

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and It is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with the aforesaid offence, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail by the officer arresting on executing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer. The Applicant shall also abide by the following conditions:-

¶23

(i) That the applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation before the concerned police officer as and when required;

¶24

(ii) That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat undue influence to the prosecution witnesses;

¶25

(iii) That the applicant shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶26

Certified copy as per rules.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶29

Santosh

Ghanshyam Choudhari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghanshyam Choudhari 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

Rohit Singhania and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Smt.usha Golechha Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Akhilesh Rajwade Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mrs. Vinita Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Puran Lal Thakur Vs S Prakash (Ias)

Rakesh Kumar Sao Vs State of Chhattisgarh