Allowed

Balram Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC18 Apr 2024CRA/447/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed an appeal against the rejection of regular bail. Observing the investigation was complete and that no merit comment was necessary at this stage, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed the release of appellants on personal bond under specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; appellants released on regular bail by filing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety and complying with appearance and non-tampering conditions.

Balram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRA No. 447 of 2024

¶5

Balaram Sahu S/o Shri Ubheyram Sahu Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Samhar, P.S. Tendukona, Tehsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund,Chhattisgarh.

¶6

Hemlal Sahu S/o Balaram Sahu Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Samhar, P.S. Tendukona, Tehsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund,Chhattisgarh.

¶7

Manoj Sahu S/o Balaram Sahu, Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Samhar, P.S. Tendukona, Tehsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund,Chhattisgarh.

¶8

Nanchu @ Parmanand Sahu, S/o Balaram Sahu Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Samhar, P.S. Tendukona, Tehsil Bagbahara, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Appellants(in jail)

¶10

Versus

¶11

State Of Chhattisgarh Through House Officer Bagbahara, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

¶12

---- Respondent

¶13

For Appellants : Mr. Krishna Tandon, Advocate For State : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy. Govt. Adv. For Objector : Mr. Palash Agrawal, Advocate

¶14

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board

¶15

19/04/2024

¶16

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (henceforth 'the Act of 1989') has been preferred against the order dated 25.1.2024 by which learned Special Judge (Atrocities) Mahasamund, Disrtrict-Mahasamund rejected application of appellants for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.200/2023 registered at Police Station Bagbahara, District-Mahasamund for commission of offence punishable under Sections 306, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC); Section 3 (2) (v) of the Scheduled Castes and

¶17

¶18

Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of 1989 (for brevity 'the Act of 1989'), as per charge sheet.

¶19

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that dead body of Bharat Gond was found hanging with tree in the agricultural field. Morgue was reported in the concerned police-station. After recording morgue statement, aforementioned crime was registered against appellants and appellants were arrested on 23.1.2024.

¶20

Learned counsel for appellants submits that the appellants have been falsely implicated in instant crime and they have not committed any offence as alleged against them. There is no evidence of instigation in the charge-sheet filed by the prosecution. From the material available in the charge-sheet, it is appearing that once some quarrel took place between appellants and others with complainant and as per allegation, appellants and others assaulted the complainant once, hence, no offence under Section 306 of IPC would be attracted.

¶21

On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposing submissions of learned counsel for appellants, would submit that on making false allegation, deceased was threatened, abused and also assaulted. From the date and time of assalt, he left the house and thereafter he was found hanging.

¶22

Learned counsel for the Objector adopts the arguments advanced by counsel for state. However, counsel for State or objector does not dispute the fact that allegation of abusing and assaulting is only once as per material available in the charge-sheet.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed along with appeal.

¶24

Taking into consideration nature of allegations, submission of counsel for the parties, investigation is complete, charge-sheet is filed and appellants are in jail since 23.1.2024, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to enlarge appellants on regular bail.

¶25

¶26

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, order passed by the Court below is set aside and it is directed that appellants shall be released on regular 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 trial Court concerned on the conditions that;

¶27

a) they shall appear before trial Court concerned regularly on each and every date unless exempted from appearance.

¶28

b) they shall not, in any manner, tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶29

c) If they are found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail. Certified copy as per rules.

¶30

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶31

Nisha

Balram Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balram 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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rishi Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deepak Dhamecha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Pomeshwar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Punanand Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yogesh @ Mangesh Vaidh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ishwardas Manikpuri Vs State of Chhattisgarh