Shankar Sonwani And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 5889 of 2020

1. Shankar Sonwani, Son of Late Dashru Sonwani, Aged about 70 years

2. Heeraman, S/o. Late Dashru Sonwani, Caste Satnami, Aged about 45 years

3. Shiv Kumar, Son of Indarman Sonwani, Caste Satnami, Aged about 30 years All R/o. Village Barbaspur, Police Station, Tahsil and District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ---- Applicants

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Kotwali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant : Shri V.K.Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Adil Minhaj, GA Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 01/09/2020 Heard on admission.

Admit.

The accused/applicants have moved these bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing them on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.230/2020 registered at Police Station - Kotwali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 323,307,147,148 and 149 of the IPC.

It is the case of the prosecution that the complainant who is the daughter of deceased has lodged a report alleging that on account of some land dispute, the applicants entered their house and assaulted her parents with axe and club and caused injuries. Counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that earlier the applicants have lodged a report against the complainant party and therefore a counter case has been lodged against them. He submits that the injuries were simple in nature. He further submits that similarly placed co-accused persons have been granted bail by this court in M.Cr.C. No. 4691/2020 and 5642/2020 vide order dated 28.08.2020 and therefore the present applicants may be granted the benefit. He submits that the applicants are in custody since 20.05.2020; charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its final disposal, they may be released on bail. On the other hand, counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular, the detention period of the applicants and that the injuries were simple in nature, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case, in which, the applicants should be enlarged on regular bail. Accordingly, the applications filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed. It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/-

with one surety each in like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their appearance before the said Court as and when directed till the disposal of the trial.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge suguna