High CourtsSingle Bench

Vinod Prasad Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 28 January 2022 · Citation: (2022) 01 CHH CK 0090

HON’BLE JUDGES
Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 439 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 201, 302, 313, 363, 364, 365
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 9370, 9825, 10168 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

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

27 paragraphs · 538 words
1.

Since all the bail applications are arising out of same crime number they are being heard and decided by this common order.

2.

These bail applications are filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested in connection

with Crime No. 33/2021 registered at Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur Ramanujganj for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201,

363, 364, 365, 120B, 313 read with 34 of the I.P.C.

3.

Prosecution story in brief is that on 16/06/2021 dead body of one unknown female was found inside the Kanhar river, Village-Indrawatipur. Merg

intimation was lodged by one Mohan Singh. On 20/06/2021 the dead body was identified as Soni Devi by the father and mother of the deceased.

During course of investigation, the FIR was lodged against the unknown persons. After investigation, memorandum statements of accused persons

were recorded and offence has been registered.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. No incriminating article has been

seized from the possession of the applicants, therefore, offence under Sections 302, 120(B), 313, 363 and 364 read with 34 of the IPC can not be

made out even from the material available in the charge-sheet. The applicants did not play any active role for the murder of Late Soni Devi. He would

further submit that the applicants are in jail since 27/07/2021 and conclusion of trial may take some time as also co-accused have already been granted

bail by this Court in MCRC No.9168/2021, therefore, they may also be enlarged on bail.

5.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

7.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly nature of allegation against the present applicants as also the evidence collected

by the prosecution against them and release of co-accused persons namely; Laxman Yadav, Munshi Yadav and Nitish Kumar Yadav on bail vide

order dated 17.12.2021 bearing MCRC No.9168 of 2021, this Court is inclined to release the applicants on bail.

8.

Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond

for a sum of Rs. 5000/- with one surety each of the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court on following conditions:-

i. they 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 him

from disclosing such fact to the Court;

ii. they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial;

iii. they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till the disposal of the trial;

iv. they shall not involve themselves in any offence of similar nature in future;

v. while furnishing the bail bonds, the applicants and the person who stand surety shall submit their Aadhar Cards and full-sized colored postcard size

photographs mentioning their Aadhar numbers on the same before the trial Court who shall verify the same.