Rajiv Rai @ Raju Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:6150

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 480 of 2025

¶5

1 - Rajiv Rai @ Raju S/o Ravi Rai Aged About 21 Years R/o Mendharmar Colony, Dharamjaigarh, Police Station - Dharamjaigarh Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh

¶6

2 - Sumit Chakrawarti @ Mithu S/o Shri Sanjit Chakrawarti Aged About 20 Years R/o Mendharmar Colony, Dharamjaigarh, Police Station - Dharamjaigarh Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

¶7

3 - Sanatan Rai @ Meru S/o Sunil Rai Aged About 30 Years R/o Mendharmar Colony, Dharamjaigarh, Police Station - Dharamjaigarh Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Applicants

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Of Police Station - Dharamjaigarh Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

¶11

--- Respondent

¶12

For Applicants : Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, PL.

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

03/02/2025

¶16

This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.234/2024, registered at PS – Dharamjaigarh Distt. Raigarh Chhattisgarh, for commission of offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 296, 351(2), 115(2), 3(5) of the BNS.

¶17

Case of prosecution, in brief, is that present applicants have assaulted the deceased Hemsingh Baiga by means of hands and fist and also

¶18

2

¶19

pushed him towards the wall, due to which, he suffered grievous injuries and he was taken to the hospital where during treatment he died. Based upon report, FIR was registered and applicants were arrested in the aforementioned crime/offence.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in this case, they have not committed any offence as alleged against them. Deceased was in drunken condition on the date of alleged incident and as per post-mortem report, cause of death of deceased due to going to coma by head injury. There is no any other previous criminal antecedent against the applicants. Applicants are in jail since 08.09.2024, charge sheet has been filed, conclusion of trial may take some time, hence, they may be released on bail.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants and would submit that there is specific allegation against the applicants of committing the aforesaid offence/crime, hence, they are not entitled for grant of bail.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶23

Considering facts of the case, nature of allegations, statements of the prosecution witnesses, further the fact that deceased was in drunken condition on the date of alleged incident, as per post-mortem report, cause of death of deceased due to coma by head injury, there is no any other previous criminal antecedent against the applicants, further considering that there is no evidence/material which shows that applicants have made any attempt to tamper with the prosecution witnesses, applicants are not having any previous antecedent, period of detention of applicant ie since 08.09.2024, charge-sheet has been filed, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application.

¶24

3

¶25

Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that applicants shall be released on regular bail, on their furnishing a bail bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- each with one surety in like sum to satisfaction of concerned Court on the conditions that-

¶26

a) applicants 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 them from disclosing such fact to the Court.

¶27

b) applicants shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and

¶28

c) applicants shall appear before trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶29

Certified copy as per rules.

¶30

Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶31

J.

Rajiv Rai @ Raju v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Rai @ Raju 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

Sunita Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sunita Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kesharibai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vishal Dwivedi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sonkumar Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt.Neeta Singh Vs Laxminarayan and Ors.