Devraj Dhritlahre Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2025:CGHC:33914

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 4921 of 2025

¶6

1 - Devraj Dhritlahre S/o Ramesh Kumar Dhritlahre Aged About 22 Years R/o Village - Sapos, Police Station - Sankara, Tahsil - Pithora, District - Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶7

2 - Chandra Prakash Patela S/o Narottam Patela Aged About 18 Years R/o Village - Sapos, Police Station - Sankara, Tahsil - Pithora, District - Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶8

... Applicant(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station - Sankara, District - Mahasamund (C.G.)

¶11

... Respondent(s)

¶12

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

¶13

For Applicant(s) :	Mr. Pragalbh Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent(s)/State :	Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravind ra Kumar Agrawal

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

17/07/2025

¶17

This is first bail application seeking grant of bail to the applicants, who are in jail since 06.03.2024 in connection with Crime No. 24/2024 registered at Police Station Sankara, District Mahasamund for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 294, 323, 325 and 302 IPC.

¶18

Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.21 18:43:48 +0530

¶19

2

¶20

The case of prosecution is that, on 05.03.2024 at about 9 PM the grandson of deceased Shankar Lal namely Ajay Dhruw along with his friends Somnath, Tapuraj and Hemant went to village side where the accused Hetram met, who scolded them that they are engaged in commission of theft and some altercation took place between them. He (Hetram) called Dhiraj, Karan, Chandraprakash, Sunil and Manohar and all of them assaulted them by hand and fist. Ajay and his friends came back to their house and informed their family members. Thereafter, when the deceased asked Hetram as to why they have committed marpeet with their family member, all the accused persons including the present applicants Devraj Dhritlahre and Chandraprakash Patela started assaulting the deceased Shankar. Even after when he fell down on the ground, the accused persons continued in assaulting deceased on his chest and neck. One Hirabai came to intervene in the quarrel, she too was being assaulted by the accused persons. The incident was witnessed by Motiram Dhruw, who seen the accused persons fleeing from the place of occurrence. When Shankar was taken to the Hospital, he was declared brought dead. In the postmortem report, the doctor has opined that cause of death is shock due to extensive hemorrhage and injury to vital organ and nature depends upon circumstantial evidence. In the internal examination the doctor found intracranial bleeding in fronto-parietal right middle cervical cavity. Number of injuries were found on the body of deceased Shankar. Merg was intimated by the doctor and after merg enquiry FIR has been registered against the accused persons

¶21

3

¶22

including present applicants. The applicants have been arrested on 06.03.2024 and after investigation charge sheet was filed.

¶23

Learned Counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. There is no active participation of the applicants in commission of offence or assaulting the deceased. The doctor has not opined that deceased died due to homicidal death, but has opined that nature depends upon the circumstances of the case. The name of present applicants appeared in the first instance when altercation took place between Ajay Dhruw and Hetram. The allegation against them at that time was only assault that too by hand and fist whereas, the deceased received injuries subsequently in another incident in which omnibus allegation of assault have been made against them. He would further submit that up to 02.05.2025, 13 prosecution witnesses have been examined, but the witnesses have not supported the prosecution’s case with respect to the present applicants. The applicants are in jail since 06.03.2024, therefore, they may be released on bail as final adjudication may take sometime.

¶24

On the other hand, the counsel for the State opposes the bail application and have submitted that there are eyewitnesses to the incident who clearly stated about involvement of present applicants that they along with other accused persons have actively participated in the offence and have committed marpeet with the deceased. Number of injuries have been found on the body of deceased Shankar,

¶25

4

¶26

which was as a result of assault made by the accused persons and deceased died due to said injuries. Hira Bai is the injured witness who was also assaulted by the accused persons when she tried to intervene in the assault. The other witnesses are Motiram Dhruw, Hitesh Dhruw, Ajay Dhruw, Naveen Tumaniya, Tappuraj Bhoi, Dhaneshwar Varge and Hemant Yadav who named the present applicants as the assailant. He would further submit that out of 17 witnesses, 13 witnesses have already been examined and the trial is at its advance stage. The bail application of co-accused Sunil Anant @ Anil Anant and Karan Dhritlahare have already been rejected by this Court on 18.11.2024, passed in MCRC No. 4894 of 2024 and 27.06.2025, passed in MCRC No. 4946 of 2025. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled for bail.

¶27

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶28

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and the material collected during the investigation, particularly in view of statement of eyewitnesses with respect to involvement of present applicants in crime in question and the injuries found on the body of deceased, the trial of the case is at advance stage and 13 witnesses have already been examined, the bail application of the co-accused persons Sunil Anant @ Anil Anant and Karan Dhritlahare have already been rejected by this Court, I am not inclined to release the applicants on bail.

¶29

5

¶30

Accordingly, the present bail application of the applicants Devraj

¶31

Dhritlahare and Chandraprakash Patela is rejected .

¶32

Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶33

ved

Devraj Dhritlahre v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devraj Dhritlahre v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajkumar Kathaute Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Bhawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar Gairarey Vs the Union of India

Prahalad Tent House Vs Mamta Patel

Kishor Kumar Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanjay Kimtani Vs State of Chhattisgarh