Dismissed

Sonu Paikara @ Lodhi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC12 Oct 2018MCRC/6058/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In the first bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the applicant accused of murder was rejected bail as he was found absconding despite coaccused being acquitted, and the High Court declined to give benefit of the section due to the seriousness of the offence and impact on society.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; applicant cannot be released on bail.

Sonu Paikara @ Lodhi Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 6058 of 2018

¶5

Sonu Paikara @ Lodhi S/o Late Kenduram Paikara Aged About 26 Years R/oVillage Amatoli Pataila Para P.S. And Tahsil- Sitapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Sitapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Non-applicant

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Vinit Kumar, Advocate. For Non-applicant : Mr. Ashok Swarnkar, Panel Lawyer

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

12.10.2018

¶14

This is first bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the applicant before this Court and no other bail application is pending before any other Court.

¶15

Perused the case diary provided by the learned counsel for the State in connection with crime No.116/2015 registered at Police Station – Sitapur, District – Sarguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

Case of the prosecution, in brief is that in the intervening night of 20.05.2015 and 21.05.2015 at Village Aamatoli, Indira Awas applicant, coaccused Rajendra Ghasiya, AnakSai had beaten the deceased Ismail Khan with club, hand and fist. Deceased died instantly. Thereafter they

¶17

¶18

buried the deadbody under sand of Mand river.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal background. He is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, therefore, he shall be released on bail.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

¶21

The applicant was absconding. Other coaccused Rajendra Ghasiya and Anaksai have been acquitted.

¶22

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, looking to the seriousness of the offence, looking to the impact of granting bail to the applicant on society, this Court is not inclined to give benefit of Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. to the applicant.

¶23

Consequently, the present bail application is rejected.

¶24

Certified copy as per rules.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

(Sharad Kumar Gupta) JUDGE

¶27

kishore

Sonu Paikara @ Lodhi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Paikara @ Lodhi 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

Panchram Dhimar Vs State

Harish Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ashish Gupta Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Pannalal Vs the State of Madhya Pradesh

Ramanad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahadev and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh