Allowed

Pritesh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC24 Apr 2024MCRCA/176/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted anticipatory bail to a young applicant apprehending arrest for alleged kidnapping and abduction. Despite the prosecution case, the court was inclined due to the applicant's youth, lack of criminal history, and the fact that co-accused faces were covered.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail with one surety; directed to make himself available for interrogation and not induce witnesses.

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

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRCA No. 176 of 2024

¶5

Pritesh S/o Chaitu Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Dhaudai, P.S.Dhaudai, District- Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Dhaudai, DistrictNarayanpur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Shri Shobhit Koshta, Advocate For State : Shri K.K. Baharani, Panel Lawyer

¶11

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

25/04/2024

¶14

Applicant has preferred this application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail as he is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.1 of 2024 registered at Police Station- Dhaudai, PS – Narayanpur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 365, 366, 323, 34 of IPC.

¶15

Case of the prosecution in brief, is that, on 05.01.2024 at about 8:00 pm, co-accused Ramdayal Yadav came to house of victim, asked her to accompany him saying that he loves her and wanted to marry her. Upon refusal, he again came back along

¶16

-2-

¶17

with 5 to 6 other persons, assaulted victim, her sister and brother and thereafter forcefully took the victim on motorcycle. When complainant followed the assailant, they left two motorcycles and ran away. On the next date based on the phone call given by the police, Ramdayal Yadav brought the victim in the police station. Based on the report aforementioned crime was registered against Ramdayal Yadav and his 5-6 friends.

¶18

Learned counsel for applicant would submit that applicant has been falsely implicated in crime. His name has come only in memorandum statement of co-accused. He also submits that as per allegation, other friends of Ramdayal Yadav have covered their faces and there is no mention in statement of the victim or complainant that they can identify accused persons who entered into the house. Applicant is a young boy aged 19 years, there is no criminal antecedents, hence, he may be protected by granting him benefit of anticipatory bail.

¶19

Learned counsel for State opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that there is specific allegation that Ramdayal along with his 5-6 friends entered into the house of complainant. In the memorandum statement of Ramdayal, it has come that applicant is also one of the persons who associated with him and entered into the house of complainant and have forcefully taken his sister. Upon asking, he do not dispute submission of learned counsel for the

¶20

-3-

¶21

applicant that in the statement of victim it has come that the persons who came along with Ramdayal have covered their faces. Upon asking he further submits that out of two motorcycles seized, the RC of one motorcycle is available which recorded in the name of Lakkhu Ram Yadav, father of the coaccused Ramdayal. He also submits that there is no criminal antecedents of the applicant.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, material available in the case diary as also the fact that persons who entered into the house of complainant had covered their faces, submission of learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been made accused only on the basis of memorandum statement, age of the applicant, there is no criminal antecedents of the applicant, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶24

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

¶25

-4-

¶26

(i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when required;

¶27

(ii) the applicant 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 facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶28

Certified copy as per rules.

¶29

Sd/----/-/-/-/---//Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶30

Praveen

Pritesh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pritesh 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

Dukhuram Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rajkumar Sawlani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Xyz Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Devanandan @ Tullu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shubham Das Mahant Vs State of Chhattisgarh