Ashok Janghel & ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 8387 of 2019
1. Ashok Janghel S/o Bodhiram Janghel Aged About 48 Years R/o Murai, Police Station Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
2. Manglu S/o Bodhiram Janghel Aged About 42 Years R/o Murai, Police Station Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh
3. Dhanesh Verma S/o Bharat Lal Verma Aged About 35 Years R/o Vishnupur, Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
4. Chhotu @ Rupesh Janghel S/o Ashok Janghel Aged About 19 Years R/o Murai, Police Station Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioners
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicants :
Shri Abhishek Sharma, Advocate For Respondent :
Shri Anil Tripathi, P.L.
Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board 07/02/2020 1.
The applicants have preferred this first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with Crime No.295/2019, registered at Police Station - Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 294, 323, 34 IPC.
2.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 30.10.2019, a report was lodged by the complainant Rajwantin Bai in police station Chhuikhadan alleging therein that on 29.10.2019 at about 6.00 pm, the present applicants entered the house of complainant hurling abuses, asked whereabouts her husband Panchram and started assaulting the family members by
hands and fists. When her husband came to the house, the applicants also assaulted him and her father-in-law as a result of which they sustained injuries. Based on this, offence has been registered. The present applicants have been taken into custody on 09.12.2019.
3.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the injuries sustained by the complainant party are simple in nature. He also submits that the applicants have also filed counter case. It is next submitted that the applicants are in custody since 09.12.2019, charge sheet has been filed and there is no likelihood of their case being decided in near future. Therefore, they may be released on bail.
4.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application.
5.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6.
Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of injury sustained by the complainant and further considering the fact that the applicants are in custody since 09.12.2019, charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicants on bail.
7.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8.
It is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one solvent surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their appearance before the said Court as and when directed, till the final disposal of the trial. Certified copy, as per rules.
Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Pekde