Akash Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

The appellant has preferred this Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’) for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.703/2021, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Korba for offence under Sections 302, 201, 506/34 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act.

¶17

2

¶18

Prosecution case is that the present appellant has lodged a Dehati Nalishi alleging that accused Akash Sharma and Suraj Sahu after committing murder of Aniket Goyal in the night of 27^th July, 2021 had thrown the dead body under the bridge near Tarakhar Darri Road, and the dead body was taken from the spot in the Auto of accused Akash Sharma. Based on such information, investigation was commenced and the charge sheet has been filed against accused Akash Sharma and Suraj Sahu, whereas the present appellant was cited as witness in the prosecution list. The present appellant was examined on 15^th September, 2023. After his examination, the prosecution has preferred an application under Section 319 of the CrPC on 6^th September, 2024 for taking cognizance against the present appellant, as he was also last seen with the deceased along with other co-accused persons. The said application was allowed by the trail Court on 1.10.2024. The appellant has preferred an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the trial Court, which was dismissed. Hence this Appeal.

¶19

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the present appellant has not committed any offence and during investigation also, the police has not found any evidence against him and he was not charge sheeted. The present appellant has lodged a Dehati Nalishi of the incident. During trial proceeding, without any sufficient evidence, cognizance has been taken against him. He further submits that the offence was not committed on account of caste of the deceased and, therefore, bar under Section 18 of the Act does not attract in considering the anticipatory bail application. Prima facie, there was no involvement

¶20

3

¶21

of the appellant in the crime in question. Therefore, the Appeal may be allowed.

¶22

On the other hand, learned State Counsel would oppose the bail application and would draw attention of the Court towards the statement of Abhishek Goyal (PW-3) wherein at para-5 he has deposed that the present appellant was also last seen along with the deceased and other co-accused. However, he fairly admits that except the said statement, no other evidence is available on record against the present appellant.

¶23

Shri Vijay Goyal, father of the deceased, appears before this Court through VC from concerned DLSA and opposes the bail application.

¶24

Considering the submissions of the parties, particularly considering the fact that the present appellant has lodged an FIR which was registered as Dehati Nalishi on 29.7.2021; after completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed only against accused Akash Sharma & Suraj Sahu and their memorandum statements have also been recorded pursuant to which seizure was effected and that during trial, the prosecution has preferred an application under Section 319 of the CrPC after recording the statement of the present appellant on 15^th September, 2023, which was allowed on 1.10.2024, this Court is inclined to release the appellant on anticipatory bail.

¶25

Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of the appellant, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer with the following conditions:-

¶26

4

¶27

(i) he shall not influence the witnesses during trial.

¶28

(ii) he shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶29

(iii) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.

¶30

Sd/(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶31

Barve

Akash Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khelan Singh Tande Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Smriti Griha Construction Vs Sandeep Agrawal

Smt. Honey Tripathi Vs Aditya Tripathi

Pappu Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chandrashekhar Netam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ajit Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh