Chattisgarh High Court
Rajju @ Chatrabhan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 2 September, 2022
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRA No. 898 of 2022
1. Rajju @ Chatrabhan S/o Jagnu Maravi Aged About 45 Years,
2. Jagdish, S/o Hira Singh, Aged 55 Years,
Both are R/o Village- Ghatoli, Outpost- Chilfi, P.S.- Lormi, Dist.- Mungeli
(C.G.) ---- Appellants
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Outpost- Chilfi, Through P.S.-
Lormi, Dist.- Mungeli ---- Respondent
For Appellants Shri Pallav Mishra, Advocate.
For Respondent /State Shri Ashutosh Mishra, PL.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 02/09/2022
1. The present appeal arises out of an order dated 6/05/2022 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mungeli, in BA No.158/2022.
2. The appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act, 1989') for grant of bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.197/2021, registered at Police Station Lormi, Chowki Chilfi, Mungeli, District Mungeli (CG), for the offence under Sections 506, 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code; Sections 4, 5 of the Chhattisgarh Tonahi Pratadna Act, 2005; and Sections 3(2)(5), 3(1)(;)(£) of the Act, 1989.
3. As per the prosecution case on 14-6-2021 an intimation was given by one Yashoda Bai that her mother set herself ablaze. Subsequently, the dying declaration was recorded wherein the 2 deceased named all the accused persons i.e. Rajju @ Chatrabhan, Jagdish, Sarojini Bai & Sushila Bai that they along with other villagers have abetted her by calling her as Tonahi. Consequently, she was forced to commit suicide.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that till date only the statement of Kotwar is recorded and the appellants are in jail since 30/07/2021 and for no reason the appellants are lodged in jail and considering the nature of allegation primarily which is under Section 306, 107 of IPC which is read with Section 4 and 5 of Chhattisgarh Tonahi Pratadna Act, 2005, no purpose would be served to keep the appellants in jail. Therefore, the appellants may be enlarged on bail.
5. Despite notice to the complainant no representation is made.
6. Learned State counsel opposes the argument.
7. Though on an earlier occasion the appeal for bail was dismissed on merits, however at this stage since it appears that till date Kotwar has been examined which is not disputed by the State. It appears that considerable delay has caused, taking into degree of offence, no representation is made on behalf of the complainant, I am inclined to allow this appeal.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set-
aside.
9. Appellants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said Court.
10. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Goutam Bhaduri) Judge gouri