Allowed

Rameshwar Munda @ Motu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC9 May 2022MCRC/2422/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, allowed a first bail application under Section 439 CrPC for three applicants arrested in connection with an offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323, 342, 302 IPC. The court granted bail despite opposing submissions regarding homicidal death.

What did the court decide?

Applicants to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum.

Rameshwar Munda @ Motu Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 2422 of 2022

¶4

Rameshwar Munda @ Motu S/o Rojjo Munda, Aged About 25 Years R/o Jamtoli, Police Station-Tumla, District-Jashpur (C.G.)

¶5

Rojjo Munda S/o Late Jharo Munda Aged About 53 Years R/o Jamtoli, Police Station-Tumla, District-Jashpur (C.G.)

¶6

Shankar Ram Munda S/o Mangra Ram Munda, Aged About 35 Years R/o Jamtoli, Police Station-Tumla, District-Jashpur (C.G.)

¶7

---- Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station-Tumla, District-Jashpur (C.G.)

¶10

---- Respondent

¶11

For the Applicants : Shri Deepak Jain, Advocate. For the Respondent/State : Smt. Meena Shastri, Addl. A.G.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant ORDER

¶13

09.05.2022

¶14

Heard.

¶15

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.35 of 2021, registered at Police Station – Tumla, District – Jashpur, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506 part-II, 323, 342 & 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are in jail since 05.08.2021 and have been falsely implicated in this case. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed. It is further

¶17

¶18

submitted that according to the facts, the only case made out against the applicants would be under Sections 294, 506, 323 & 342, 34 of the IPC, which are bailable offences. The incident occurred on 14.7.2021 whereas, the deceased has died on 29.7.2021. Premshila Tirkey, sister of the deceased has lodged the Dehati Nalishi, in which she stated that the deceased was suffering from fever and chest pain because of which, he has died, therefore, the death of the deceased cannot be related to the act of the applicants. The applicants are ready to abide by all the conditions that may be imposed on them. Hence, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on bail.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and the submissions made in this respect. It is submitted that the deceased was assaulted by these applicants regarding which, a prompt FIR was lodged. It was the injury caused to the deceased, which has resulted in his death, which is reflected from the postmortem report, mentioned as old head injury and the doctor has opined that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature, therefore, no case is made out for grant of regular bail to the applicants.

¶20

4. Heard counsel for both the parties and perused the case diary.

¶21

According to the prosecution case, on 14.7.2021, deceased – Bhagat Munda was caught hold by these applicants and who was tied with rope in the house of these applicants. Subsequent to that, these applicants abused him, threatened him and assaulted him with hands, fists and kicks. One

¶22

¶23

witness – Goya Ram came to intervene, who was also assaulted by these applicants. FIR was lodged, subsequent to which, the examining doctor has opined that the injuries present on the body of the deceased are simple in nature. He has not admitted for any treatment. In later on development, on 29.7.2021, deceased – Bhagat Munda has expired. Thereafter, Section 302 of the IPC was registered against the applicants.

¶24

Considered on the submissions. After considering the submissions made by the applicants' counsel, that it is not a case of murder punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel inclined to grant bail to the applicants in this case.

¶25

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶26

It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, for their appearance as and when directed. In case any default is committed by the applicant/s in appearing before the concerned trial Court, this order granting bail shall stand cancelled automatically.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

¶29

Nimmi

Rameshwar Munda @ Motu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rameshwar Munda @ Motu 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

Ishwar Podyami Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Suresh Khute Vs State of Chhattisgarh

College of Nursing Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jagan Gaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sagar Mahilange Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kripa Chand Sonwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh