Dismissed

Smt. Jamuna Bai Ganjir v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC13 Sept 2017MCRC/5308/2017

Download

Case brief

from the order text

What is this about?

CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5308 of 2017…

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Jamuna Bai Ganjir Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Dowry and Cruelty | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶2

MCRC No. 5308 of 2017

¶3

Smt. Jamuna Bai Ganjir, W/o. Dadu Singh Ganjir, Aged About 52 Years, R/o. Village Sarona, Tahsil Narharpur, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh, Civil & Revenue District North Bastar Kanker.

¶4

---- Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through the Station House Officer, Police Station Narharpur, District North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

---- Respondent

¶8

For Applicant : Mr. Sandeep Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

¶9

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶10

Order On Board

¶11

13.09.2017

¶12

This is the second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.67/2016 registered at Police Station- Narharpur, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 304B/34 of I.P.C. The first bail application was dismissed as withdrawn on 24.08.2016 in MCRC No.4877 of 2016 with liberty to repeat the same after examination of the witnesses of dying declaration.

¶13

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 14.04.2016 the deceased Shakuntala sustained burn injury and subsequently in late hours she died. It is alleged that she was married to the son of the present applicant namely Kailash Ganjir and thereafter she was subjected to torture for demand of dowry. The deceased was married in the year 2011 and within seven years, the incident happened. Therefore, the offence has been committed.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that two of the alleged dying declaration witness PW-9 & PW-10 have not supported the case of the prosecution and the statement of the Doctor PW-6 would show that at the time when the dying declaration was recorded, the deceased was not in a state of condition to depose. He further submits that the dying declaration was recorded by the Police Inspector, therefore, the applicant who is an old lady, may be released on bail.

¶15

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

¶16

Perusal of the case diary, statement and dying declaration. Considering the same, at this stage, it would not be proper for this Court to evaluate the entire statement and evidence, as it would amount to adjudicate the case on merit while hearing the bail application. Considering the entirety of the case and dying declaration, I am not inclined to entertain the instant second bail application.

¶17

Accordingly, the second bail application is dismissed.

¶18

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge

¶19

Ashok

Smt. Jamuna Bai Ganjir v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Smt. Jamuna Bai Ganjir v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Kumar Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Golu @ Mahendra Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Dharampal Nayak Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ramsai Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Samaru Ram Nishad Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Jitendra Sarthi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh