SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(CG) 4167

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRCA No. 318 of 2024

1. Samajik Lal Rathore S/o Narayan Prasad Rathore, aged about

65 Years R/o Village- Sapiya, Police Station- Dabra, (Wrongly Mentiondas Station- Faguram), Tahsil - Adbhar,district- Sakti (C.G.).

2. Vinay S/o Samajik Lal Rathore aged about 40 Years R/o Village-

Sapiya, Police Station Dabra Tahsil- Adbhar, District- Sakti Chhattisgarh.

3. Satish Rathore @ Khagendra Rathore S/o Khemchand Rathore, Aged About 41 Years R/o- Village- Sapiya, Police Station- Dabra, Tahsil- Adbhar, District- Sakti Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicants Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Oicer, Police Station-

Dabra, District- Sakti Chhattisgarh.

---- Non-Applicant (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Applicants : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Buxy, Panel Lawyer For Objector : Mr. Hariom Rai, Advocate.

Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board

01.05.2024

1. This irst anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been iled by the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 392/2022 registered at Police Station – Dabra, District Sakti (C.G.) for the ofences punishable under Sections 451, 294, 506, 323, 34, 354 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC).

2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 24.05.2022, the victim has submitted a written report that on 30.04.2022, when the victim is doing the household work the applicants entered into the house of the victim and have committed the “Marpeet”. On the basis of the allegation made by the victim and after conducting a preliminary enquiry, the FIR for the ofences punishable under Sections 451, 294, 506, 323, 34 of the IPC has been registered on 29.09.2022 against the applicants and the applicants have been granted bail by the police as the ofences are bailable in nature, but after lapse of more than 1 and half year, when the notice was given by the police for iling the charge sheet, the non- bailable ofences under Sections 324 and 354 and 92 (b) of the Rights of Person with Disability Act, 2016 was added.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have not committed any ofence which is punishable Under Sections 451, 294, 506, 323, 34, 354, 324 of the IPC and Section 92 (b) Rights of Person with Disability Act, 2016. He further submits that the applicant Nos.1 and 2 are the father-in-law and brother-in-law of Ekeshwar Prasad Rathore and the husband of the victim is the real brother of Ekeshwar Prasad Rathore. On 20.02.2022, the husband of the victim has outrage the modesty of the daughter of the applicant No.1, for which the daughter of the applicant No.1 has lodged the FIR against the husband of the victim under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits that being aggrieved by the registration of the FIR against the husband, the victim has lodge the FIR against Ekeshwar Prasad Rathore on 02.03.2022 and on the basis of which the judgment of conviction and order of sentence has been passed on 04.10.2023. He also submits that again the husband of the victim and the victim has abuse and beaten the daughter of the applicant No. 1 for which the daughter of the applicant No. 1 again lodge the FIR against the husband of the victim and the victim on 03/04/2022. On the basis of which again a false report has been lodge on 24.05.2022 by the victim against the applicant in which earlier the bailable ofences has been registered but all of sudden in the month of January, 2024 the medical documents has been sought by the police and on the basis of which the ofence Under Section 324 and 354 of the IPC and 92 (b) of the Rights of Person with Disability Act, 2016 has been added. He further submits that the police has iled the charge sheet before the trial Court and along with the charge sheet a disability certiicate of the victim was attached which was issued on 29/12/2023. He also submits that against the victim all the villagers of Village - Sapiya has given the complaint to Superintendent of Police, Sakti that the victim is lodging the false reports and the victim can roped any body in the false case. Therefore, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application of the applicants.

5. Mr. Hariom Rai, learned counsel for the objecter/complainant submits that complainant is a 50% disabled lady. He further submits that the applicant No. 01 along with applicant Nos. 2 and 3 stabbed the complainant. Therefore, they are not entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

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

7. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and nature of dispute and material available in case

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top