Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 23 (CHH)

SUNIL KUKREJA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2002-03-22

FAKHRUDDIN

body2002
FAKHRUDDIN, J. ( 1 ) HEARD. ( 2 ) A case in crime No. 121/2001 has been registered at Saraswati Nagar, Police Station for the offences punishable under sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 427, 294, 307 and 302 IPC against the applicant. ( 3 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution the incident took place on 6/6/2001 in which Ravi Shukla lost his life and two other persons namely Deepak Jagwani and Nandlal Patel have sustained injuries. Learned State counsel has filed, reply and referred to the F. I. R. , other documents, case diary and statements of Sonu Kukreja. He submits that on hearing the hues and cries of Deepak Jagwani, the victim Ravi Shukla reached the spot and the accused persons who were already present on the spot attacked Ravi Shukla and caused various injuries on his person leading to death. FIR was lodged by Sonu Kukreja, the complainant, who was watching the incident. Counsel for the State has opposed the application for grant of bail. ( 4 ) IT is stated that applicant No. 2 Seebu Shukla is the person who is said to have played active role in the commission of crime. He had pulled the deceased and played active role along with Dhananjay Parihar, Sunil Thakur, Madhukar Pandey and Sanjay Parihar. Apart from forming unlawful assembly they had participated in the crime and assaulted As such application of applicant No. 2 Seebu Shukla is rejected. ( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the applicants further submitted that though. the applicant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 are alleged to be members of unlawful assembly they did not inflict any injury to the deceased or to the witnesses. He read out the FIR and the statements. ( 6 ) IN support of his submission. ( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the applicants further submitted that though. the applicant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 are alleged to be members of unlawful assembly they did not inflict any injury to the deceased or to the witnesses. He read out the FIR and the statements. ( 6 ) IN support of his submission. learned counsel for the applicants relied on the decisions in the cases of Mushtaq Shah v. State of M. P. Ram Prasad v. State of M. P. Dhan Singh v. State of M. P. Hariram Singh Thakur v. State of M. P. and a decision of Apex Court in the case of Kalachand Bhowmik and another v. State of Tripura5 ( 7 ) HAVING considered the facts and circumstances of the case, material available on record, the period during which applicants No. 1, 3 and 4 are in jail and without expressing further on merits as charges are yet to be framed and material is to be considered by the trial Court and in the ends of justice the applicants No. 1 Sunil Kukreja, No. 3 Nand Kishore and No. 4 Prakash Pantone are directed to be released on temporary bail for a period of six months on their each furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for their immediate surrender before the trial Court after the expiry of the six months. The bail bond shall contain photograph, details of moveable and immovable property belonging to the applicants ( 8 ) THE appellant No. 1 Sunil Kukreja, No. 3 Nand Kishor and No. 4 Prakash Pantone shall not tamper with prosecution evidence and shall maintain peace and tranquilty and shall not indulge themselves in any crime. They shall attend the concerned police station on 1st and 3rd Sunday of every month between 10 to 12 a. m. The applicants No. 1. 3 and 4 shall attend all dates of hearing before the trial Court and shall not seek adjournment and shall co-operate in trial. The applicants No. 1, 3 and 4 shall not leave Chhattisgarh without permission of the court. If these applicants violate any of the aforesaid conditions their bail shall be liable to be cancelled forthwith. 3 and 4 shall attend all dates of hearing before the trial Court and shall not seek adjournment and shall co-operate in trial. The applicants No. 1, 3 and 4 shall not leave Chhattisgarh without permission of the court. If these applicants violate any of the aforesaid conditions their bail shall be liable to be cancelled forthwith. ( 9 ) IN view of the discussion above, so far as application of applicant No. 2 is concerned the same is rejected. Applicant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 are granted temporary bail for a period of six months. Parties are entitled for certified copy of this order. Application disposed of accordingly. --- *** --- .