The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected a bail application filed by two accused persons in a murder case. The court held that the gravity of the offence and the prosecution material, including recovered evidence, made it unfit for bail.
Bail application rejected. Trial court directed to conclude trial expeditiously.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
M.Cr.C. No. 968 of 2017
----Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Police Station Durgukondal, District North Bastar, Kanker.
---- Non-Applicant
: Shri Sandeep Shrivastava, Advocate.
For Applicant : Shri Sandeep Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Ashish Shukla, Government Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri
Order On Board
02/03/2017
2
offence. There is no evidence to connect the present applicants with the crime in question. They are in jail since 25.05.2014 and 15.05.2014 respectively. Therefore, the counsel prays that the applicants may be enlarged on bail.
Sd/(Goutam Bhaduri) Judge
Amit
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicants in a murder case involving strangulation and complicity under Section 302 IPC.
Whether the prosecution material including recovered memo statement and diary sufficiently connects applicants to the crime to deny bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Devnidhi Narwaas
Phoolchand
Goutam Bhaduri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
