Allowed¶24

Ramesh Rajput v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 May 2025MCRC/2683/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; M.Cr.C No.2683 of 2025; Ramesh Rajput vs State of Chhattisgarh; Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari; decided 05.05.2025; regular bail under Section 439 CrPC; Crime No.641/2022, Police Station Sakri, Bilaspur; Sections 302/34, 120-B, 201 IPC; Sections 25 & 27 Arms Act; conspiracy with Kapil Tripathi; deceased Sanju Tripathi; co-accused Kedar Singh, Aman Gupta, Sumitra Tripathi; incarceration more than 2 years since 21.12.2022; no previous criminal antecedents; not present on spot; personal bond Rs.50,000/- with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted: Applicant to be released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, and to make appearance before the concerned Court as and when so directed. ¶24

Ramesh Rajput Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant, arrested in connection with Crime No.641/2022 (Police Station Sakri, Bilaspur) for offences under Sections 302/34, 120-B and 201 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, is entitled to grant of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶15

Court's answer

The Court allowed the second bail application particularly considering that the Applicant's period of incarceration is more than 2 years, that he does not have any previous criminal antecedents, and that he was not present on the spot of commission of crime.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The bail application was allowed without further commenting anything on merits, and the Applicant was directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like sum, with appearance before the concerned Court as and when directed.

¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail — Regular bail granted under Section 439 CrPC to Ramesh Rajput, arrested on 21.12.2022 in Crime No.641/2022 (P.S. Sakri, Bilaspur) for offences under Sections 302/34, 120-B and 201 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act; prosecution alleged he conspired with main accused Kapil Tripathi against deceased Sanju Tripathi, who was shot dead near mines barrier, Sakri. Second bail application; earlier application (M.Cr.C No.3494/2023) had been dismissed as withdrawn on 18.07.2023. Grant rested on incarceration exceeding 2 years, absence of previous criminal antecedents (fairly admitted by State), and the Applicant's absence from the spot, expressly without comment on merits. Parity noted with co-accused Kedar Singh and Aman Gupta (bail by Supreme Court) and Sumitra Tripathi (bail by co-ordinate Bench, 26.04.2023, M.Cr.C No.1370/2023). Release ordered on personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like sum.

2025:CGHC:20482

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

M.Cr.C No.2683 of 2025

¶6

Ramesh Rajput S/o Kunwar Singh Aged About 55 Years R/o 27 Kholi, House No. 34, Ward No. 16, Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant

¶7

versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Office, Police Of Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant

¶9

For Applicant : Shri Achyut Tiwari along with Shri Shyam Kumar, Advocates.

¶10

For Non-Applicant : Shri HAPS Bhatia, PL.

¶11

Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2025.05.06 19:00:24 +0530

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

05.05.2025

¶15

This is the 2^nd bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the Applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.641/2022 registered at Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur for the offence under

¶16

¶17

Sections 302/34, 120-B and 201 IPC and also under Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act. Earlier application has been dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.07.2023 passed in M.Cr.C No.3494/2023.

¶18

Prosecution case is that the present Applicant hatched a conspiracy along with main accused Kapil Tripathi against deceased Sanju Tripathi for which, he started performing rekie on him 3-4 days prior to the incident i.e. 14.12.2022. It is alleged that 2 days prior to the date of incident, the present Applicant invited the deceased and main accused Kapil Tripathi to saanvtaal party at his home. But as the deceased had to leave the said place, therefore, upon the information of the present Applicant, other accused persons reached mines barrier, Sakri, Bilaspur and killed the deceased there by firearms. Based on such allegations, offence has been registered.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question for which, he was arrested on 21.12.2022. He further submits that from the possession of the present Applicant, only one mobile has been recovered but the sim card which has been used for the commission of said crime has not been recovered from him. He further submits that he was not present on the spot and only on the basis of suspicion, he has been arrayed as an accused in the said crime. He further submits that co-accused Kedar Singh and Aman Gupta were enlarged on bail by the Supreme Court and one female co-accused namely Sumitra Tripathi has also been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench vide order dated 26.04.2023

¶20

¶21

passed in M.Cr.C No.1370/2023. He lastly submits that the present Applicant is in jail since more than 2 years i.e. 21.12.2022, the trial is likely to take quite some time for its conclusion, therefore, he may be released on bail by this Court.

¶22

On the other hand, learned counsel for the Non-Applicant/State opposed the bail application and fairly admitted that the present Applicant does not have any previous criminal antecedents.

¶23

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering that the period of incarceration of the Applicant is more than 2 years and that he does not have any previous criminal antecedents and also considering the evidence that he was not present on the spot of commission of crime and without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to allow the application.

¶24

Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that on Applicant’s furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, he shall be released on bail. He shall however, make his appearance before the concerned Court as and when so directed.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶27

Priya

Ramesh Rajput v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Rajput 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

Shankar Lal Agrawal Vs Umesh Sinha

Chhagan Lal Ganjeer Vs Kaushilaya Bai

Maulana Waliullah Vs Kyamuddin Hasan Urf Panne Kabadi

Rajesh Kumar Vs Sunil Dewangan

Shailendra Kumar Tamboli Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramavtar Sahu Vs Gulab Chand