Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 190 (CHH)

Murli Reddi v. State of C. G.

2014-04-30

GOUTAM BHADURI

body2014
ORDER Goutam Bhaduri, J. 1. This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 19/2014 registered at P.S. Bhilai (Bhatti) Civil District and Revenue District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 354(1)(2)(3)(B)/34 of IPC. According to the prosecution case, on the date of incident i.e., 27.1.2014 when the Kho-Kho team of the South Eastern Railway which had been to Durg to play a match, on that day in between 9-11 a.m., the other accused namely S. Raju tried to outrage the modesty of one of the complainants the prosecutrix. Similarly on 28.1.2014 co-accused Jag Bandhu tried to take out the garments of one of the other lady-players which was objected and somehow or the other they escaped. Subsequently Jag Bandhu shown some obscene photographs in the mobile and requested the complainant girls to repeat the same. According to the prosecution, against this applicant Murli Reddi, who is a coach, the allegations have also been levelled that he also continued with such act to outrage modesty of the girls and used to talk obscene things. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in the FIR in this case pertains to the dates 27.1.2014 and 28.1.2014 and on the said dates, the applicant was not present and no allegations have also been levelled against this applicant. He further submits that only general allegations have been made against this applicant that he used to talk obscene things with the girls whereas the main allegations are attributed to co-accused S. Raju and Jagbandhu, therefore, this applicant was not at all responsible for the said acts. He would further submit that this applicant is in jail since 30.1.2014 and the charge sheet has been filed, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 3. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the same and would submit that the allegations have also been levelled against this applicant and he being the coach used to speak obscene things and tried to outrage the modesty of the girl. 4. I have gone through the statements of the complainant girls, the prosecutrix. 5. 3. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the same and would submit that the allegations have also been levelled against this applicant and he being the coach used to speak obscene things and tried to outrage the modesty of the girl. 4. I have gone through the statements of the complainant girls, the prosecutrix. 5. In the present incident, the charge sheet has been filed, the main averments have been made against accused S. Raju arid Jag Bandhu and though allegations have been made against this applicant but was not of the date of incident. Considering the statements of the prosecutrix/complainant girls and for the fact that the charge sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 30.1.2014, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. He is directed to appear before the said Court on each and every date given by the said Court. Application allowed.