Sumit Nirmalakar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 16 July, 2025

0
19

[ad_1]

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

appellant. Despite service of notice being effected on

the Standing Counsel representing the respondent-State

and the proof of service of the same having been filed,

no one has entered appearance on behalf of the

respondent-State.

3. The present appeal arises out of the impugned

judgment and order dated 14.01.2025, passed by the High

Court of Chhattisgarh in MCRC No. 297 of 2025 whereby,

the High Court has rejected the bail application filed by

the appellant seeking regular bail in connection with the

Crime No. 641/2022 registered at Police Station-Sakri,

District-Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, for the offence

punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal

Reason: Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’) and Sections 25 and 27

of the Arms Act, 1959.

[ad_2]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here