Govind Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 6997 of 2017 • Govind Singh S/o Late Sadan Singh, Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Salka, Police Station And Tahsil Khadgawan, District Korea, Chhattisgarh ----Applicant

Versus

• State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Khadgawan, District Korea, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicant :

Shri Shailendra Dubey, Advocate For Respondent-State :

Shri S.K. Mishra, PL for the State Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 28/11/2017

1. This is the 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 2-11-2016 in connection with Crime No. 177 of 2016, registered at Police Station Khadgawan, District Korea (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 294 & 435 of the IPC.

2. The Firs Bail Application was dismissed on merits on 03.01.2017.

3. As per prosecution case, a report was lodged by one Smt. Mamta Choubey on 2-11-2016 at 9.30 a.m., that she had purchased the land at village Salka and on the date of incident i.e., 2-11-2016 she along with her brother-in-law Rajendra Choubey and her driver went to her land wherein Ram Vichar Kewat sowed harvest, he was advised not to do as the land was purchased by them. When it was objected, at that time, Ram Vichar Kewat, his family

members and present applicants Govind Singh and Ajay Singh along with other co-accused persons abused them and started assaulting the complainant. During such course, Rajendra Choubey, brother-in-law of the complainant was caught hold by present applicants Govind Singh and Ajay Singh and other accused persons assaulted him by way of axe. Subsequently complainant was also caught hold by the present applicants and she was assaulted by way of sickle and thereafter vehicle of the complainant i.e., Safari CG-15-B-1177 was set to fire and thereby the aforesaid offence was committed.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that after rejection of the earlier bail application on 03.01.2017, the charge-sheet has been filed and the injured was hospitalized only for 5 days, therefore, no offence is made out against the applicant and he may be enlarged on bail.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

6. Perused the earlier bail rejection order dated 03.01.2017 by which the bail was dismissed on merits. Considering the same I do not find any charge of circumstances to reconsider this repeat bail application. It is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu