Ramgilas Verma And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2342 of 2017

1. Ramgilas Verma . S/o Gopiram Verma, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Chhechhar, Police Station Kasdol Civil & Revenue DistrictBaloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh.

2. Smt. Chheeta Bai, W/o Ramgilas Verma, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Chhechhar, Police Station Kasdol Civil & Revenue DistrictBaloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kasdol, Civil & Revenue District Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Applicant :

Mr. Adil Minhaj, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Mrs. M. Asha, Panel Lawyer -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 20-04-2017 1.

This is second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 2-6-2016 in connection with Crime No. 212 of 2016, registered at Police Station Kasdol, District Baloda Bazar (CG), for the offence punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 302, 201, 34 of the IPC.

2.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that one Ramkumari died by burning on 27-5-2016, she was married to Manharan and the present applicants are brother-in-law and sister-in-law, Jeth and Jethani. It is alleged that the applicants along with husband of the deceased treated the deceased with cruelty, therefore, she died unnatural death.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that this second bail petition and earlier bail petition was dismissed on merits on 3-11-2016. He would further submit that the applicants are in jail since 2-6-2016, no charges have been framed so far, therefore, they may be released on bail.

4.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

5.

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

6.

Perused the earlier bail rejection order dated 3-11-2016 which was dismissed on merits. Considering the same, I do not find any change of circumstances to reconsider the second bail application. 7.

Taking into nature of allegations leveled against the applicants and further consideration the medical expert report which shows that the deceased got the burn injury after death, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

8.

Accordingly, the second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. is also liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Raju