Allowed

Albis Kujur v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC24 Nov 2024MCRC/7776/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to an applicant charged with murder and other offences. The Court allowed the application on second bail, directing the release on a bond and imposing specific conditions to ensure attendance and prevent abuse of bail.

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail allowed; applicant to be released upon furnishing a bail bond of ₹25,000/- with one surety and complying with specific attendance and conduct conditions.

Albis Kujur Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

1 / 3

2024:CGHC:45988

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 7776 of 2024

¶6

Albis Kujur S/o Somara Kujur Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Boirdeeh, Sonajori, Police Station And Tahsil Lailunga, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

• State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, Police Station Lailunga, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent
For Applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shukla, Advocate
For Respondent- State : Mr. Ritesh Giri, Panel Lawyer

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD

¶11

25/11/2024

¶12

Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 208/2023 registered at Police Station – Lailunga, District Raigarh (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 302, 449, 120-B R/w Section 34 of IPC.

¶13

Case of prosecution in brief is that on 16.07.2023 when the deceased was returning back to her house from the agricultural fields in the afternoon, applicant along with other co-accused persons assaulted her by means of hands, fists and legs, due to which, she succumbed to injuries. Morgue was reported to the concerned police station, based

¶14

PAWAN KUMARJHA upon which, aforementioned crime was registered and the applicant was

¶15

Digitally signed by PAWAN arrested on 18.07.2023. KUMAR JHA

¶16

2 / 3

¶17

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the instant crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged. There is no connecting material in the charge- sheet except the memorandum statement of the applicant and the other coaccused persons. He submits that the husband of the deceased has now been examined before the learned Trial Court and he has not supported the case of prosecution. He further contended that memorandum witnesses have also been examined and have not supported case of prosecution. Applicant is in jail since 18.07.2023, hence, he may be enlarged on bail. He also submits that other co-accused Sushil Bada and Suraj Prakash Agariya have already been enlarged on bail in MCRC No. 6507/2024 and MCRC No. 8053/2024.

¶18

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶20

Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, period of pre-trial detention of the applicant, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that-

¶22

(a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶23

(b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶24

3 / 3

¶25

(c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶26

(d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶27

Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

(Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE

¶30

pwn

Albis Kujur v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Albis Kujur 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

Dr. Nohar Prasad Jangade Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Rajesh Kumar Kotwani

Shiv Kumar Ahirwar Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh, Vs Anil Kumar Tiwari

Mukesh Mishra @ Harishchandra Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Ishwari Jaiswal Vs Naveen Kumar Jaiswal