Allowed

Ramnarayan Sarthi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 Jul 2016MCRC/861/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the first bail application by Ramnarayan Sarthi under Section 439 CrPC in a rape and murder case, directing his release on personal bond with a surety due to lack of prosecution evidence and no eyewitness.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by executing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court.

Ramnarayan Sarthi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 861 of 2016

¶4

Ramnarayan Sarthi S/o Hilochan Sarthi Aged About 27 Years R/o Kida, P.S. Chhal, Civil & Rev. Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, Police Station Chhal, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

¶8

---- Respondent

¶9

For the applicant : Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent : Ms. Shobha Kashyap, Dy.Govt. Adv.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶11

Order on Board

¶12

04.07.2016

¶13

This is first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of regular bail to the applicant in connection with Crime No. 80 of 2014 registered at P.S. Chhal Civil & Revenue District Raigarh (C.G) for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 376 r/w section 34 IPC.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, on 04.09.2014, one Janki Bai was raped and thereafter she was murdered. It is the case of prosecution that the applicant who is husband along-with one co-accused Parmeshwar has committed sexual assault and thereafter committed rape and murder.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no evidence is available against this applicant and on the memorandum of witnesses, the applicant has been falsely implicated and the seizure witnesses have not supported the case of prosecution. Therefore, they may be enlarged on bail.

¶16

Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application.

¶17

Perused the statement of seizure witness Rameshwar Prasad at whose instance the recovery was made. The seizure witness has also not supported the case of prosecution. There is no eye-witness to the incident.

¶18

Thus considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into facts that seizure witness has not supported the case of prosecution and there is no eyewitness to the incident as also the fact that the charge sheet in this case has been filed and looking to the period of detention as the applicant is stated to be in jail since 2014, without any observation on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶19

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 shall also appear before the trial Court as and when directed by the said Court.

¶20

C.c. as per rules.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE

¶23

R a o

Ramnarayan Sarthi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramnarayan Sarthi 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

Sunil Kumar Agrawal @ Bhagat @ Pramod Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Jitendra Kumar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ashok Chandraker and Others Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ashok Kumar and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Lalit Katale Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Hazi Rauf Mehbub Bombaywala Vs State Of Chhattisgarh