High CourtsSingle Bench

AKHILESH SINGH vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 12 March 2018 · Citation: (2018) 03 CHH CK 0152

HON’BLE JUDGES
P. SAM KOSHY
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 201, 302
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
MCRC No. 299 of 2018

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 406 words
1.

The present is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the applicants. The applicants are in jail since 21.03.2017, in

connection with Crime No. 165/2017, registered at Police Station Jaamul, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201 read

with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2.

The allegation against the present applicant as per the prosecution case is that, the present applicant along with the other co-accused person is said

to have assaulted one Vishwanath Yadav on 19/03/2017 on account of which the said Vishwanath Yadav succumbed to the injuries.

3.

The counsel for the applicants submits that, the trial in the instant case has already began and most of the material witnesses have already been

examined including the two eye-witnesses namely Sunil Pandey and Jitendra Nagrere and all the material witnesses till now examined have turned

hostile and have not supported the case of the prosecution including the witnesses who were closely related to the deceased i.e. the father and brother

in law of the deceased.

4.

With the aforesaid facts the counsel for the applicants submits that, there is no possibility of conviction with the evidence that have till now been

brought on record and thus prayed for releasing the applicants on bail.

5.

The State counsel however opposing the bail application submits that, few more material witnesses are left to be examined and therefore the

present applicants looking to the gravity of the offence did not deserve bail at this juncture and thus prayed for rejection of the bail application.

6.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case what reflect is that, most of the independent material witnesses including the eye

witnesses have already been examined and the only witnesses left are the police officials who are departmental witnesses. None of the material

witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile.

7.

Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that prima-facie a strong case for grant of bail has been made

out.

8.

Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on there furnishing a personal bond

in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for there appearance before the said Court as and

when directed.