Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Champa, District
Case Details
1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR NAFR MCRC No. 6441 of 2025 1 - Sagar Yadav S/o Shri Sarju @ Ganesh Yadav Aged About 20 Years R/o Ward No.02, Bhainsabaazar, Champa, P.S. Champa, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Champa, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For State : Mr. Amit Buxy, P.L. MCRC No. 6473 of 2025 1 - Durgesh @ Dadoo S/o Ganesh Ram Dheewar Aged About 19 Years R/o Village- Kanwarpara, Ward No.03, Champa, Police Station Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ---Appellant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Station - Champa District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) --- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. P.M. Shriwas, Advocate. For State : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, G.A. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.08.28 10:13:32 +0530 2 MCRC No. 6553 of 2025 1 - Som @ Sushant Yadav S/o Shri Atish Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Vill- Purana College Road Dhobipara, Champa, P.S. - Champa, Dist. - Janjgir - Champa, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O. P.S. Champa, Dist.- Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Advocate. For State : Mr. Amit Buxy, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 26/08/2025 1. Since all these MCRCs arise out of the same crime number 54/2025, they are being heard and disposed of by this common order. 2. These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 54/2025 registered at Police Station Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 118(2), 190, 191(2)(3), 111(1), 109, 103, 103(2) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act. 3. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged against the 3 present applicants that on 16.02.2025 at about 8:30 – 9:00 pm, along with other co-accused persons abuses and threatened for life to Ramdhan Patel and Sahil Patel and also assaulted with hands, belt and knife due to which Sahil Patel, and Ramdhan Patel sustained grievous injuries and subsequently, Ramdhan Patel died during the course of treatment. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicants and other co-accused persons. 4. Learned counsels for the applicants submit that the applicants are innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. They further submit that the applicants are not named in the FIR. The police have recorded the statement of the victims Ramdhan and Sahil Patel wherein they have not made any allegation that anyone except the main accused Sarvan @ Ledhu and Golu Manjhi, the other have caused the injury to him with a knife. They further submit that nothing has been seized from appellant Sagar Yadav and Durgesh @ Dadoo. They next submit that the applicants’ implication is solely based on the Drishya Panchnama dated 20.04.2025 and CCTV footage. There are total 10 accused persons in this case out of which 3 accused persons are minor who has been granted bail and one major co-accused namely Chandraprakash Yadav has 4 also been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 4638/2025 on 18.07.2025. They also submits that applicants Sagar Yadav and Som @ Sushant are in jail since 19.02.2025 and applicant Durgesh @ Dadoo is in jail since 29.04.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, they prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicants, along with other co-accused persons, committed a heinous offence of murder. The names of the present accused persons have come in the statements of Sohan Kenwat, Ramayan Bai, Anushka, Dolly Yadav and Ganga Devi. There is a seizure of a stick from the accused, Som @ Sushant, and applicant Sagar Yadav has 4 criminal antecedents; therefore, at this stage, they may not be enlarged on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that injured Sahil Patel turned hostile and in statement of deceased Ramdhan Patel recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. the names of the present applicants have not been mentioned, nothing 5 incriminating has been seized from appellants Sagar Yadav and Durgesh @ Dadoo, but there is a seizure of a stick from appellant Som @ Sushant and further considering the fact that no over act has been done by appellants Sagar Yadav and Durgesh as per the statements of Sohan Kenwat, Ramayan Bai, Anushka, Dolly Yadav and Ganga Devi, but there is a clear mention of over act by appellant Som @ Sushant that he has assaulted the deceased and injured by means of stick, applicant Sagar Yadav is in custody since 19.02.2025 and applicant Durgesh @ Dadoo is in custody since 29.04.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the bail applications of applicant Sagar Yadav (applicant in MCRC No. 6441/2025) and applicant Durgesh @ Dadoo (applicant in MCRC No. 6473/2025), however I am not inclined to allow the bail application of applicant Som @ Sushant (applicant in MCRC No. 6553/2025). 8. Accordingly, the applications (MCRC No. 6441/2025 and MCRC No. 6473/2025) are allowed and the application (MCRC No. 6553/2025) is rejected. It is directed that applicants Sagar Yadav and Durgesh @ Dadoo shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum 6 to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicants are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. H.L. Sahu Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge