Allowed

Apesh Jaal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Aug 2023MCRC/4783/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single order hearing two second bail applications in a murder case. The court allowed bail, relying on witness statements exonerating the applicants, lack of antecedents, and parity since a similarly situated co-accused was already granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayers for regular bail allowed. Accused directed to execute personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety and appear before trial court.

Apesh Jaal Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

M.Cr.C. No. 4783 of 2023

¶5

Apesh Jaal, S/o Kartik Jaal, aged about 28 years, R/o Village – Chhibarra, Thana & Tahsil – Saraipali, Dist. Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶6

---- Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Saraipali, Dist Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶9

----Non-applicant

¶10

M.Cr.C. No. 5118 of 2023

¶11

Jitendra Pradhan, Son of Mukund Pradhan, aged about 26 years, Resident of Chhibarra, Police Station and Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶12

---- Applicant

¶13

Versus

¶14

State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Station House Officer, Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶15

----Non-applicant

¶16

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Applicant : Mr. Sudhir Sharma, Advocate in M.Cr.C. No. 4783 of 2023 For Applicant : Mr. Sushobhit Singh, Advocate in M.Cr.C. No. 5118 of 2023 For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Priyanshu Gupta, Panel Lawyer ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶17

Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K. Chandravanshi

¶18

Order On Board

¶19

03-08-2023

¶20

Since both bail applications arise out of a same Crime No. 177 of 2022 and same police station, therefore, they are being heard together and decided by this Common Order.

¶21

¶22

The accused/applicants have preferred these second bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail in connection with Crime No. 177 of 2022 registered at Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶23

The applicants' first bail applications were dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide common order dated 04.04.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. Nos. 8777 of 2022 & 424 of 2023, respectively with liberty to file appropriate bail applications after examination of material prosecution witnesses.

¶24

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that in the night of 29.4.2022, dispute occurred on account of dance in the marriage procession at village Chhibarra, police Station Saraipali as the applicant and other coaccused persons, despite outsiders, wanted to dance in the marriage procession, which was objected, hence, by means of wooden club and bat, they assaulted Rajkumar Sidar, as a result thereof he sustained injuries and succumbed to those injuries.

¶25

Learned counsel appearing for the respective applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the crime in question only because they are resident of that village i.e. Chhibarra. It is further submitted that 09 prosecution witnesses have been examined including eye-witnesses to the incident. Certified copy of the deposition of those witnesses have been filed, which show that none of the witnesses, including the alleged eyewitnesses have stated the involvement of the present application in the alleged crime in question. Further, the applicants are in custody since 29/34-4-2022, no criminal antecedents have been reported against them and conclusion of the trial is likely to take long time, as 10 witnesses are yet to be examined. It is lastly submitted that similarly situated coaccused namely Haresh Pradhan has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.06.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 3425 of 2023,

¶26

¶27

hence, the applicants may also be granted bail on the ground of parity.

¶28

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by counsel for the applicants.

¶29

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as well as material available on record.

¶30

Out of total 19 prosecution witnesses, 09 witnesses have been examined including eye-witnesses to the incident. Certified copy of the deposition of those witnesses have been filed by the applicants. Having considered the statements of aforesaid witnesses; pri-trial detention of the applicants and the fact that similarly situated co-accused namely Haresh Pradhan has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.06.2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 3425 of 2023; I am inclined to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, both bail applications are allowed.

¶31

Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court.

¶32

Certified copy, as per rules.

¶33

Amit/

¶34

Apesh Jaal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Apesh Jaal 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

Kuleshwar Thakur Vs Lilambar

Mahesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bheekham Lal Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Reeta Chand Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Munikaran Mishra Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Abhishek Nirmalkar @ Monu Vs State of Chhattisgarh