Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 282 (CHH)

Sheikh Suleman v. State of C. G.

2014-07-25

P.SAM KOSHY

body2014
Order P. Sam Koshy, J. 1. By way of the present application u/s. 438 of Cr.P.C. the applicant has sought for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 69/14 registered at PS Kunda, District Kabirdham for the offence punishable u/s. 354, 294, 323 and 506 of IPC. 2. Allegation against the present applicant is that on 23.05.2014 the applicant is said to have assaulted complainant Raisa Khatoon and also tried to outrage her modesty when the complainant is said to have gone to the shop (chicken shop) of the applicant. Subsequently, a report was lodged and a case was registered against the applicant in connection with the said offence. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case where the present applicant has been falsely implicated on account of the fact that the daughter of the applicant was married to the brother of the complainant but the said marriage failed and ultimately the daughter of the applicant lodged a complaint against her husband i.e. brother of the complainant and the family members including the complainant under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act. In the said case, the CJM, Kabirdhan vide its order dated 24.06.2013 found the allegation levelled against the husband and his family members to be correct and accordingly ordered for payment of Rs. 5,000 per month as maintenance to the daughter of the applicant and also directed the accused persons therein not to ill treat the daughter of the applicant. Counsel for the applicant submits that in order to take revenge, the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant. 4. On the other hand, State counsel opposes the bail application on the ground that specific allegation has been made by the complainant against the applicant. 5. Having considered the total facts and circumstances of the case, the story of the prosecution seems to be improbable for the reason that it is not a natural conduct for a businessman running a shop try to outrage the modesty of a girl in front of his shop where large number of people are present near the shop. Particularly against the person against whom the relationship was sour. Particularly against the person against whom the relationship was sour. It appears that after the complaint made by the daughter of the applicant against the brother of the complainant and his family members including the complainant, the relationship between the applicant and the complainant was not cordial, therefore, prima facie the present appears to be a case of false implication. 6. For the foregoing reasons, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the present applicant can be granted the advantage of being released on anticipatory bail. 7. In the result, the application u/s. 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the present applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 25,000 with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer arresting him. Application allowed.