Varsha Vasnik And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Misc. Criminal Case No.508 of 2016

1. Varsha Vasnik, W/o Shri Anil Vasnik, aged about 25 years,

2. Ranu Sharma, W/o Rajesh Sharma, aged about 22 years, Both R/o Shiv Para, Muram Khadan, Supela, Tahsil & District Durg (C.G.) ---- Applicants

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Supela, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant AND Misc. Criminal Case No.615 of 2016 Dugeshwari @ Minu Sharma, W/o Shri Rajesh @ Rajiv Sharma, aged about 40 years, R/o Shiv Para, Muram Khadan, Supela, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, Through District Magistrate, Durg (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicants:

Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate.

For Non-applicant:

Mr. Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 08/02/2016

1. Since both the applications are arising out of the same crime number, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. The accused/applicants have moved these bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.866/2015, registered at Police Station Supela, Bhilai, Distt. Durg, for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 506, 323 and 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 23-10-2015, two coaccused namely Anil Wasnik and Rakesh Sharma assaulted complainant / victim Tukeshwar Nishad by which he suffered grievous injuries and the present applicants also assaulted the complainant by hands and fists, and injuries suffered by the complainant were sufficient to cause death.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in the case. The applicants are women and main assailants are Anil Wasnik and Rakesh Sharma, co-accused. The applicants are in jail since 31-10-2015. Charge-sheet has been filed and no useful purpose will be served by keeping the applicants in jail.

5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail applications.

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

7. Taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence, facts and circumstances of the case, role of the present applicants, nature of injuries, pretrial detention of the applicants and the fact that chargesheet has already been filed, I am of the opinion that the applicants should be enlarged on regular bail. Accordingly, the applications are allowed.

8. It is, therefore, directed that the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for their appearance as and when directed.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma