Allowed

Shankar Jagat v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Feb 2024MCRC/462/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under Section 439 CrPC in a gang rape case where the victim did not identify the applicant and identification rested solely on CCTV footage. The court granted bail on a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with one surety and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond of Rs.25,000 with one like surety, subject to conditions of regular appearance and non-tampering with witnesses.

Shankar Jagat Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No.462 of 2024

¶5

Shankar Jagat S/o Ganga Jagat Aged About 40 Years R/o House No. 31/10 Near Shiv Mandir, Nehru Nagar Bhilai, Thana Supela, Dist. Durg (C.G.)

¶6

.... Applicant (In Jail)

¶7

Versus

¶8

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Vaishali Nagar, Dist. Durg (C.G.) ....Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Damrudhar Yadav, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer

¶9

....Non-applicant

¶10

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

¶11

Order On Board

¶12

06.02.2024

¶13

This is first application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who is in custody since 23.9.2023 in connection with Crime No.207/2023 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Durg (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 376-D, 450, 506, 34 of IPC.

¶14

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 18.9.2023 at about 11 p.m. in the night, when the victim was alone in the house, two persons entered into her house and after gagging her, committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. Next day, upon arrival of husband of victim, footage of CCTV camera was viewed and in one of the footages, two persons by name Jay Sabar and Tandi were seen entering into

¶15

¶16

house of victim at relevant point of time. Thereafter, report of incident was lodged in concerned police based upon which aforementioned crime was registered and accused persons were arrested on 23.9.2023.

¶17

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in instant crime. Victim has not identified the applicant as the person who committed rape with her. Applicant has been involved in instant crime based on the CCTV footage only. In the statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164 CrPC, victim has stated that she identifies co-accused Jai only and not present applicant. As there is no identification of present applicant, no case as alleged against him would be made out. Applicant is in jail since 23.9.2023, charge sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take some, hence, applicant be released on regular bail.

¶18

Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes submissions made by learned counsel for applicant and submits that husband of victim has identified accused persons from CCTV footage. Applicant has been identified as Tandi. However, upon asking about the material showing that present applicant is also known as 'Tandi', she submits that there is no such material available in case diary/charge sheet.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of

¶21

¶22

case, nature of allegations, the fact that accused persons were identified on the basis of footage of CCTV camera, victim did not identify present applicant as an accused, there is no test identification parade, without commenting anything on merits of case, I am inclined to enlarge applicant on regular bail.

¶23

Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his 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;

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

c) If applicant is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail.

¶27

Certified copy as per rules.

¶28

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶29

roshan/-

Shankar Jagat v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar Jagat 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

Xyz (Juvenile Balak) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Karan Das Manikpuri Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Radheshyam Nag Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Aakeshwar Yadav @ Aakheshwar Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Amrit Lal Madhukar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Varsha Rani Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh