Dismissed

Basant Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Aug 2023MCRC/5589/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh rejected the applicant's second bail application under Section 439 CrPC in a murder case. The court found the gravity of the offence significant and found incriminating circumstances. The trial was remanded to expedite proceedings within six months.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; Trial directed to be concluded within six months.

Basant Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

MCRC No. 5589 of 2023

¶4

Basant Kumar Sahu S/o Balram Sahu, aged about 24 years, R/o Canal Para, Chandkhuri, P.S. Pulgaon, Tahsil and District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Applicant In Jail

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, Police Station Pulgaon, Durg, Distt. Durg (CG)

¶8

---- Respondent

¶9

For Applicant : Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Kashif Shakeel, Dy. A.G.

¶10

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board

¶11

21/08/2023

¶12

The applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with Crime No.46/2022 registered at Police Station – Pulgaon, Distt. Durg (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 364A, 365, 120B, 201 and 302 of IPC. The first application MCRC No.7613/2022 was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh after examination of memorandum and seizure witnesses vide order dated 20.10.2022.

¶13

As per the prosecution case, the present applicant along with two other co-accused persons on 6.12.2021 when the victim Shivang Chandrakar was returning from his farm house and going to Maroda, in order to obtain ransom, kidnapped him and thereafter, committed his murder and also concealed the dead body.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an

¶15

innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question on the basis of suspicion. There is no eyewitness to the incident and nothing incriminating has been seized from the applicant. The material witnesses examined so far have not supported the prosecution case. The memorandum and seizure witnesses are not deliberately turning up before the trial Court for their evidence. The applicant is in jail since 11.2.2022 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.

¶16

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

¶17

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations against the applicant, the gravity of the offence, the statements of the witnesses examined so far and the incriminating circumstances appearing against the applicant, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the instant application is rejected. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶19

Sd/ (Rajani Dubey) Judge

¶20

Khan

Basant Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basant Kumar Sahu 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

Case details

Similar cases

Seema Mandavi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Raghvendra Prasad Sharma Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Israr Salim Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nanki Bai Bargah Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Sanjay Kumar Vishwakarma Vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Arun Kumar Gupta Vs The Secretary, Pwd / Bridge Constructionn