Santkumar @ Monu Khande v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 1596 of 2018 • Santkumar @ Monu Khande S/o Kaliram Khande, Aged About 27 Years, R/o- Village Devgaon, P.S. Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Non-applicant For Applicant - Shri Sourabh Dangi, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State - Shri Vijay Bahadur Singh, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 23-04-2018 1.

Heard on the application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 10-03-2017 in connection with Crime No.17/2017 registered at P.S. - Masturi, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh for the offence under Section 302, 376, 201, 34 of the IPC. 2.

It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. No case is made out against this applicant on the basis of material present in the charge sheet filed before the Court. The evidence that is proposed against this applicant is the statement given by the witnesses Mohit Ram Kenwat, Dev Kumar and Santosh Kumar Khandekar, which only raises suspicion and does not connect the applicant with commission of the offence. Further, sample of semen of this applicant and the sample of the secretion of the private part of the deceased has not matched in the FSL report. Apart from that, the DNA sample of this applicant and the skin found in the nails of the deceased have also not matched. Further, there is no legally admissible evidence in the prosecution case. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant may be granted regular bail.

3.

Learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes the application and submits that there is sufficient evidence to make out a prima facie case against the applicant, hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 5.

According to the prosecution case, on 07-01-2017 dead body of a female was found which was identified as Mamta Khandekar. The inquest was conducted and the FIR was lodged against unknown persons. It was found in the inquest and investigation that the deceased was murdered after being subjected to sexual intercourse. This applicant was apprehended on 10-032017. On being interrogated, he made confessional statement before the police, which has been recorded as memorandum statement and some stones were seized at his instance, on which no blood has been found in the FSL report.

6.

Perused the case diary. On going through the FSL report and the report of the DNA test, it is found that argument submitted on behalf of the applicant is not without substance. Similarly placed co-accused Babla Banjare has been granted bail by this Court. Hence, for these reasons, I am of this view that this applicant is entiled to be released on bail during pendency of the trial against him.

7.

Consequently, this application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail is hereby allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his 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 his appearance as and when directed. 8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Aadil