Allowed

Uday Bariha v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC7 Feb 2024MCRC/126/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a bail application filed under Section 439 CrPC by an applicant accused of theft and dishonestly receiving stolen property. The court granted bail on a personal bond with a surety, subject to conditions regarding court appearance and non-tampering with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed; directive to release applicant on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety in like sum.

Uday Bariha Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.1

¶2

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 126 of 2024

¶4

Uday Bariha S/o Subhaneshwar Bariha Aged About 22 Years R/o Saraspara Orissa Gogomuda, District : Balangir, Orissa

¶5

---- Applicant(in jail)

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station City Kotwali Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

---- Non-applicant

¶9

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, PL. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S.B.:Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board

¶10

08/02/2024

¶11

This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on behalf of the applicant for grant of regular bail to him as he is in custody in connection with Crime No.452/2023 registered at Police Station-City Kotwali Raipur, District-Raipur(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 457, 380, 411, 34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶12

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant lodged report in concerned police station that in the intervening night 16^th & 17^th November, 2023 some persons entered into the house of the complainant and committed theft of 60-70 gm gold ornaments, 3-4 kg silver ornaments and cash of about Rs.8 lakh. Based on said complaint, aforementioned crime was registered against unknown persons. During course of investigation, co-accused persons Suraj Sona and Sunil Sona were arrested and on the basis of their memorandum statement, applicant was arrested on 25.11.2023.

¶13

Page No.2

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has been falsely implicated and he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. Applicant has been made accused only on the basis of memorandum statement of accused Suraj Sona and Sunil Sona He contended that even if the entire material available in the charge-sheet and allegation levelled against the applicant are taken on its face value, it is appearing that allegation against the applicant is only under Section 411 of IPC as co-accused after alleged commission of theft has handed over the ornaments for melting its and for the said work he was also paid money. There is no other criminal antecedent against the applicant, he is in jail since 25.11.2023, hence, he may be released on bail.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that from the possession of the applicant theft ornaments were seized. He submits that in the memorandum statement of co-accused persons, it has come that after committing theft, they handed over stolen ornaments to the applicant . For melting the same and for which they paid him money also. Upon asking, he submits that there is no other criminal antecedents against the applicant.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, period of detention; offence to be triable by JMFC, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the bail application.

¶18

Accordingly, bail application is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to

¶19

Page No.3

¶20

the satisfaction of trial Court concerned on the conditions that;

¶21

he shall appear before the trial Court concerned regularly on each & every date unless exempted from appearance.

¶22

he shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶23

If applicant is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail.

¶24

Certified copy as per rules.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶27

Nisha

Uday Bariha v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uday Bariha 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

Suraj @ Rahul Malar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Takendra Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dakeshwar Sinha @ Hariom Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhanendra Navrang Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kisan Kumar @ Krishna Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vrindavan Sona Vs State of Chhattisgarh