Allowed

Bheem Kumar Mehto v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC24 Nov 2023MCRC/7198/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the second bail application of arrested accused facing charges of murder under Sections 302/34 IPC. The court considered hostility of prosecution witnesses and detention length without commenting on merits, directing release on regular bail with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicants released on bail on executing personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one local surety of like sum.

Bheem Kumar Mehto Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 7198 of 2023

¶5

Bheem Kumar Mehto S/o Yugeshwar Mehto Aged About 26 Years R/o Village And Post Charbahauddin Panar Dalsingh Saray District Samastipur, Bihar, Presently Residing At Rameshwar Nagar, Bhanpuri P S Khamtarai, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

Jeevan Dhruw S/o Baldau Dhruw Aged About 21 Years R/o Keshdabri Parasbod P S Berla District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh, Presently Residing At Rameshwar Nagar, Bhanpuri P S Khamtarai, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶7

---- Applicants

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Khamtarai, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

---- Non-applicant

¶11

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant : Shri Priyank Rathi, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Shri Ashutosh Shukla, Panel Lawyer

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board

¶13

24.11.2023

¶14

1. This is second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested on 12.12.2021 in connection with Crime No.822/2021 registered at Police Station Khamtarai Distt. Raipur(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. First bail application of the applicants has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 06.5.2023 passed in MCRC No.2064 of 2023.

¶15

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.12.2021, the applicants assaulted deceased Dhavendra Sahu by hands and fists alleging that he is having illicit relationship with wife of applicant No.1-Bheem Kumar Mehto. Dhavendra Sahu succumbed to the injuries on the same day. Based on the above, present crime has been registered against the applicants.

¶16

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the instant case. He would further submit that as per the case of the prosecution, there are 04 eye witnesses to the incident and till date

¶17

¶18

10 witnesses have been examined including 04 eye witnesses namely, Raj Dulari (PW-1), Kiran Yadav (PW-2), Savitri Sahu (PW3) and Kranti Devi (PW-10). He would further submit that Raj Dulari (PW-1), Kiran Yadav (PW-2) and Kranti Devi (PW-10) have not supported the case of the prosecution at all and they have completely turned hostile. Savitri Sahu (PW-3), who is wife of the deceased, has supported the case of the prosecution in her examination-in-chief, but denied substantial facts in her crossexamination. He would further submit that memorandum and seizure witnesses, namely Rupesh Sahu (PW-5) and Heeralal Sahu (PW-6) have also turned hostile. He has filed certified and photocopy of the deposition of the above said witnesses. The applicants are in jail since 12.12.2021, hence, they may be released on bail.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering the deposition of the eye witnesses and other witnesses and further considering the detention period of the applicants, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I feel inclined to allow the bail application.

¶22

7 . Accordingly the application under Section 439 CrPC is allowed and it is directed that in the event of each of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one local surety each of the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their appearance before the concerned Court as and when directed by the said court, they be released on bail.

¶23

Certified copy as per rules.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE

¶26

Bini

Bheem Kumar Mehto v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bheem Kumar Mehto 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

Ku. Mamta Tirkey Vs Dr. Ravi Mittal

Tikesh Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Navbharat Fuse Comp. Ltd. Vs South Eastern Coal Field Ltd. and Ors.

Smt. Meera Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Latif Ahmed Siddiqui Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Uttara Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh