Chattisgarh High Court
Nitin Limbu Alias Munku Nepali vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 January, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Reserved on 16.12.2022
Order Delivered on 18/1/2022
MCRC No. 5774 of 2021
• Nitin Limbu Alias Munku Nepali S/o Nirmal Kumar Limbu Aged
About 40 Years R/o Gauri Nagar, Thana Kotwali, District
Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicant (In Jail)
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Thana
Lalbagh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
---- Non-applicant
MCRC No. 6086 of 2021
• Ku. Megha Tiwari D/o Alok Tiwari Aged About 24 Years R/o
Suncity (Wrongly Written As Sana City), Shrishti Colony,
Police Station Basantpur, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
---- Applicant (In Jail)
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Lalbagh,
Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
---- Non-applicant
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M.Cr.C. No.5774/2021 For Applicant : Mr. T.K. Tiwari, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, Dy. Govt. Advocate For Objector : Mr. Ranbir Singh, Mr. Shashank Thakur & Mr. Priyankesh Chandrakar, Advocates.
M.Cr.C. No.6086/2021 For Applicant : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate with Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, Dy. Govt. Advocate For Objector : Mr. Ranbir Singh, Mr. Shashank Thakur & Mr. Priyankesh Chandrakar, Advocates. 2 CAV ORDER Per Parth Prateem Sahu J,
1. As above two bail applications arise out of same crime number, they were being heard together and are decided by this common order.
2. Applicants have filed above applications under Section 439 of CrPC for grant of regular bail to them as they are in custody since 1.4.2021 & 2.4.2021 in connection with Crime No.327/2018 registered at Police Station Lalbagh, Rajnandgaon for commission of offences under Sections 302, 201, 120B, 193 of IPC and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Case of prosecution in brief is that on 10.9.2018 at about 9:30 p.m. merg was reported in concerned police station by Constable of Police Station Lalbagh, District Rajnandgaon that during patrolling duty when he reached near Rewadih Intersection on Nagpur-Rajnandgaon Road at about 8:30 p.m., he saw that one person came out from his car standing on road side bearing registration number CG04-KT-7000 in bleeding condition and fell down on road. Police Constable took injured to District Hospital in government vehicle where doctor declared him brought dead. Based on merg intimation, FIR is registered on same day at about 9:40 p.m. against unknown persons. During course of investigation, applicants were arrested on 1.4.2021 & 2.4.2021 respectively and their memorandum statements were recorded.
4. Mr. T.K. Tiwari & Mr. Maneesh Sharma, learned counsel for respective applicants would submit that applicants have not 3 committed any crime as alleged against them. Alleged murder of Shubham Namdev was committed on 10.9.2018, police surprisingly arrested applicants on 1.4.2021 & 2.4.2021 respectively without there being any material connecting them in commission of aforementioned crime. Police recorded memorandum statement of applicants on respective date of their arrest. Applicants were arrested on the basis of report of Narco Analysis Test of applicants stated to have been conducted on 5.12.2019. Narco Analysis Test report is not an admissible piece of evidence, hence on that basis only it cannot be said that there is material connecting applicants with commission of aforementioned crime. In support of contention that Narco Analysis Test report is not an admissible piece of evidence, they place reliance upon decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Selvi vs. State of Karnataka Reported in (2010) 7 SCC 263.
They further submit that after receipt of report Narco Analysis test, police recorded statement of some witnesses in the month of January, 2021. These witnesses are planted witnesses and not eyewitness of incident because none of them came forward to make any statement during these three years. It is further submitted that deceased was man of lose character, he was having relationship with several girls, he and his father were also arrested on allegation against them of commission of offence under Section 376 of IPC. Hence, possibility that deceased might be having several enemies cannot be ruled out. Except Narco Test report, there is no other material to connect 4 applicant with crime in question, hence, in view of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Selvi (supra), applicants may be enlarged on regular bail.
5. Per contra, Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State opposes submissions of learned counsel for respective applicants and submits that during course of investigation, police collected messages and details of mobile phones with whom deceased had conversation on the date of incident. Immediately after incident, statements of Virendra Kumar Namdev, relative of deceased, Ramendra Namdev, father of deceased, and others were recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Police based on material collected during course of investigation, interrogated applicants. Police gave notice to applicants and one another co-accused for undergoing Narco Analysis Test and after obtaining their consent, they were put to Narco Analysis Test. From the material collected during investigation, before putting them to Narco test, involvement of applicants in commission of aforementioned crime is prima facie appearing. He submits police recorded statements of Nikhil Sonwani, Sidar Das Vaishnav, Dileshwar Sahu, Bharti Belchandan, Madhur Kumar Meshram under Section 161 CrPC. Nikhil Sonwani and Madhur Kumar Meshram have stated in their statement that they saw deceased and applicants sitting in a car at the place of incident. Hence, there is prima facie material against applicants of their involvement in aforementioned crime.
5
6. Mr. Ranbir Singh Marhas, learned counsel for Complainant/ Objector would submit that police during course of investigation collected material and based upon material available in charge sheet, applicants were arrested. Material available in charge sheet prima facie shows involvement of applicants in commission of aforementioned crime. He also submits that report of Narco Analysis Test can be relied upon against applicants. Relying upon some paragraphs of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Selvi (supra), he submits that applicants are not entitled to be enlarged on regular bail.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused case diary placed before this Court.
8. Merg in this case was lodged by one police personnel who during his patrolling duty on 10.9.2018 at about 8:30 p.m. saw deceased coming out of car in bleeding condition and falling on road. Many things were seized by police from that car. Police also collected details of mobile phone of deceased based upon which applicant Nitin Limbu was interrogated; his statement under Section 161 CrPC was recorded. On 18.9.2018 statements of father of deceased, Virendra Kumar Namdev and Bharti Belchandan were recorded in which name of applicant Nitin Limbu, Megha Tiwari and one Golu Marwadi appeared. Thereafter statements of Nikhil Sonwani and Madhukar Kumar Meshram were also recorded.
6
9. Considering material collected by police during investigation, which is part of charge sheet, and statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC, particularly statements of Virendra Kumar Namdev, Ramendra Namdeo, Ashok Deshmukh, Nikhil Sonwani and Madhukar Kumar Meshram, I do not find present to be a fit case where applicants can be enlarged on regular bail.
10. Accordingly, bail applications are rejected.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/-