Chandan Jain vs State Of Chhattisgarh

The accused/appellants who are in custody since 11.09.2021 have filed this appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short the “SC/ ST Act”) for grant of bail in connection with Crime No.191/2021 registered at Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 341, 147, 148, 149, 427, 324 & 307 of IPC; Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s), 3 (2) (V-A) & 3 (2) (v) of the SC/ST Act.

Case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that on 01.08.2021, the complainant Champu lodged an FIR alleging that when he along his friends were going to Rajim, at that time, near Nawagaon, the accused persons came there and assaulted them by using stick, iron rod and knife.

It is pertinent to mention here that earlier bail application filed by the accused/appellants was dismissed by this Court with liberty to revive the prayer after examination of the injured witnesses vide order dated 05.05.2022 in MCRC No.556/2022.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the accused/appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that in earlier bail application it was observed that against the appellant No.1 - Chandan Jain, there are 10 criminal antecedents. He submits that out of 10 criminal antecedents 3 cases are related to Preventive Action and which are already culminated; in further 4 cases, he has already been acquitted and except this case, other two cases are pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class. He further submit injured witnesses have already been examined. He also submit that 5 co-accused persons have already been released on bail and similarly situated co-accused Kapil Thakur was also released on bail by this Court vide order dated 06.03.2023 in CRA No.2045/2022. He further submit that the appellants are behind the jail since 11.09.2021 and since then long time has been lapsed, therefore, they may be enlarged on bail.

Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly, considering the length of period of pretrial detention of the applicant, further considering that injured witnesses have been examined, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the appellants on bail.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and it is directed that on each appellant furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-with one surety each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial,

(b) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial,

(c) they shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future, otherwise, it will be open for the State counsel to take appropriate steps for cancellation of bail.