Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 221 (CHH)

RAMADHAR YADAW v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

2014-06-17

P.SAM KOSHY

body2014
ORDER 1. This is the first application filed under Section 439 of Cr PC for grant of bail to applicants-accused who have been arrested on 31.3.2014 in connection with Crime No. 554 of 2013 registered at Police Station - Kasdol, District, Balodabazar-Bhatapara, for the offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of IPC as well as under Sections 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. As per the prosecution, on 26.12.2013, the applicants-accused along with their father, Duiaruwa, aged about 80 years, entered into the house of the complainant Smt. Bartanin Bai @ Uma and assaulted her and her husband with lathi and tangia. On account of the said attack, the injured persons received multiple injuries on their body. Subsequently, an FIR was lodged on 27.12.2013 and the applicants-accused were arrested on 31.3.2014 and since then they are in jail. 3. According to the learned counsel for the applicants, complainant Smt. Bartanin Bai @ Uma and her husband Mahadeva Chauhan are habitual offender and are in a regular habit of setting of fire on the crops standing in the fields and that it was not just of the present applicants whose crops are burnt but also there are a large number of cases against the husband of the complainant that he has set of fire on the standing crops of the field of different farmers of the area. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that if we look into the medical report in the charge-sheet, it would show that all the injuries which are sustained by the injured persons are by a hard and blunt object and that no injuries were caused in any vital part of their body. Counsel for the applicants also submits that from the record it shows that the injured persons were also negligent in their medical treatment as they have left the hospital against the medical advice. 4. Learned counsel for the State, however, opposing the bail application on the ground that there are a large number of injuries on the body of the injured persons and therefore, taking into consideration the seriousness of the injuries caused to them, the applicants-accused may not be released on bail. 5. 4. Learned counsel for the State, however, opposing the bail application on the ground that there are a large number of injuries on the body of the injured persons and therefore, taking into consideration the seriousness of the injuries caused to them, the applicants-accused may not be released on bail. 5. However, taking into consideration the past antecedents of the husband of the complainant and the fact that the applicants have not attacked the injured persons on any vital part of their body and also keeping in mind that the applicants-accused have attacked the injured persons on account of the repeated setting of fire of the crops of the applicants-accused on many occasions, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case where the applicants-accused can be released on bail. 6. Accordingly, the application is allowed. It is directed that in case each of the applicants furnishes a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, then they shall be released on bail on the following further conditions:- (i) That the applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. (ii) That the applicants shall not act, in any manner, which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial. (iii) That the applicants shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them, by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Application Allowed.