Ranjit v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C.No. 4306/2015 1.

Ranjit Age 23 Years 2.

Gaurishankar Age 21 Years Both S/o Janta Lal, Both R/o Village Pendri, P.S. Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur C.G. ---Applicants

Versus

State of C.G. Through P.S. Masturi Distt. Bilaspur, C.G. ---Non-applicant For Applicants :

Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate For Non-applicant :

Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 01/09/2015 1.

This is the first bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.126/15, registered at Police Station Masturi, Distt. & Revenue Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of I.P.C. 2.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, present applicants along with three other co-accused persons alleged to have assaulted and murdered Jamuna Prasad in the intervening night of 22-23/04/2015 and also destroyed the evidence.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that applicants have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in offence in question. He would further submit that there is no evidence to connect the applicants in offence in question. He would further submit that no useful

purpose would be served by keeping them in jail. He would lastly submit that charge sheet has been filed and applicants are in jail since 24/04/2015, therefore, they may be released on bail.

4.

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

5.

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

6.

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case; further taking into consideration the nature and gravity of offence; the manner, in which, applicants are alleged to have murdered Jamuna Prasad and dead body has been thrown and the evidence available has been tried to be destroyed, this Court is not inclined to release the applicants on regular bail. 7.

Accordingly, bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is rejected.

8.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) JUDGE Tiwari