← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhMCRC/5874/2020rejected

Amrit Yadav And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-11-09Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Order reserved on 03-11-2020 Order delivered on 09-11-2020 MCRC No. 5874 of 2020

1. Amrit Yadav, S/o Tulsi Yadav, aged about 55 years.

2. Paras Yadav, S/o Ramlochan Yadav, aged about 31 years. Both are R/o Vill. Lagru PS & Tehsil Batauli, Dist. Surguja, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicants

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through the Station House Officer, Police Station Batauli, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent And MCRC No. 6695 of 2020

1. Deepak Yadav, S/o Amrit Yadav, aged about 19 years, R/o Vill. Lagru, PS & Tehsil Batauli, Dist. Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

---- Applicant

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through the Station House Officer, Police Station Batauli, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondent

For Applicants Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent /State Mr. Vikram Sharma, Dy. Govt. Adv. (Proceedings through Video Conferencing) Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra CAV Order 1.

Heard.

2.

The applicants have preferred these bail applications for grant of bail as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.61/2020, registered at Police Station - Batauli, District Surguja for the offence under Sections 341, 294, 323, 307, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.

On a dispute concerning cultivation of land applicants have assaulted injured Suraj Yadav & Ram Kumar Yadav by means of axe, club, hand & fist.

4.

While Suraj Yadav has suffered dislocation of shoulder joint amongst other injuries, Ram Kumar Yadav has suffered lacerated wound over right side upper anterior head and fracture of distalend of fibula bone. 5.

Case diary contains previous criminal antecedents carrying entries where Amrit Yadav & Paras Yadav have been proceeded under Section 107 & 116 of the Cr.P.C. on number of occasions.

6.

Considering the previous antecedents and the manner in which the injuries have been caused to the injured persons, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicants at this stage.

7.

Accordingly, both the bail applications are rejected. However, liberty is reserved to the applicants to revive the prayer for grant of bail after examination of both the injured persons.

Sd/- (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Judge Gowri