Shivam Sahu S/o Shri Chhatlal Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Lagra Police v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, City Kotwali Mungeli, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:520 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8655 of 2024 Shivam Sahu S/o Shri Chhatlal Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Lagra Police Station Sarkanda Tahsil Sipat, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh........... (Wrongly Mention Lagra Sipat In The Impugned Order) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, City Kotwali Mungeli, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent MCRC No. 8739 of 2024
Legal Reasoning
prima facie found proved and therefore, there are sufficient material against the present applicants that they are involved in the commission of the murder of the deceased. He would also submit that the other accused persons, who have been granted bail by this Court are differently placed and the allegation against them are different than the allegation against the present applicants. Therefore, they are not entitled for bail. 7. 8. I have heard learned counsel the parties and perused the case diary. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegations, material collected during the investigation and further considering the role of the present applicants, seizure of the cigarette packets and Salphaz powder inside the packets, available evidence that he brought Salphaz tablet and also considering the FSL report, in which the cigarette were found contained with Salphaz contents. Further, considering the seizure of mobile phones and the call detail reports, it cannot be said that there is no involvement or there is no evidence against the present applicants in 6 the charge sheet. The other accused persons who have been granted bail are differently situated and the allegation against them are different. Therefore, in view of the entire material collected during the investigation and the allegation against the present applicants, I am not inclined to release them on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail applications of the applicants- Shivam Sahu (MCRC No. 8655/2024) and Pooja Shrivas (MCRC No. 8739/2024) are rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved
Arguments
Pooja Shrivas W/o Narendra Shrivas Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Kharripara, Police Station- City Kotwali, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh............…(The Name Of The Husband Of The Present Applicant Pooja Shrivas Is Wrongly Mentioned In The Certified Copy Of The Impugned Order Dated 29/11/2024 As - Nerandra Shrivas In Fact The Correct Name Mentioned In Challan Is Narendra Shrivas) Versus ---Applicant State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- City Kotwali, Mungeli, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicants Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN For Respondent/State : : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate Mr. Shyam Sunder Lal Tekchandani, Advocate Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 03/01/2025 1. 2. Both these bail applications are arising out of the same crime number and therefore, they are being heard and decided together. These are the first bail applications filed by the applicants under section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail. The applicant- Shivam Sahu (MCRC No. 8655/2024) has been arrested on 09.06.2024 and the applicant- Pooja Shrivas (MCRC No. 8739/2024) has been arrested on 11.06.2024 in connection with crime No. 257 of 2024, registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh for the offence under sections 302, 201, 120-B and 328 of IPC. 3. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 06.06.2024, present applicants along with other four co-accused persons, conspired together and committed murder of the deceased- Narendra Shrivas, and hanged his dead body at an isolated place near country made liquor shop at village- Reguta. Dehati Merg intimation was given by father of the deceased Shivnarayan Shrivas, dead body of the deceased was recovered and in the postmortem report, it was opined that cause of death is Asphyxia due to strangulation. During the investigation, applicants have been taken into custody, and their memorandum statement was recorded in which they disclosed the incident. The applicant Shivam Sahu was arrested on 09.06.2024 and applicant- Pooja Shrivas was arrested on 11.06.2024, and after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed. 3 4. Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant- Shivam Sahu would submit that there is no connecting material available in the charge against the applicant in the offence of commission of the murder of the deceased. The only allegation against him is that he provide Salphaz tablet to Rakesh, on whose instruction he purchased the said Salphaz tablet from the fertilizer shop. There is no allegation that the present applicant has committed the murder of the deceased. There is no call detail connection with the other accused persons. He was unaware about the other instances, which were occurred between the other accused persons. Except his memorandum statement, no other evidence is there against him. The other co-accused persons namely; Satya Narayan @ Chhotu, Ajay @ Ajju Dhuri and Vinod Shrivas have been granted bail by this Court and the case of present applicant is also similar to that of their case. The applicant is in jail since 09.06.2024, final adjudication of the case will take its own time. Therefore, he may also be released on bail. 5. Mr. Shyam Sundar Lal Tekchandani, learned counsel appearing for the applicant- Pooja Shrivas would also submit that there is no sufficient evidence against the present applicant that she in any manner involved in the offence of the murder of the deceased. There is no direct evidence to prove that the present applicant is involved in the offence and only on suspicion she has been made as an accused in the case. Although her name appears in the memorandum statement of other co- accused persons, but that itself is not sufficient to consider the evidence against her in the case. The mobile call detail is also not admissible to connect the applicant in the offence in question. There is 4 no meeting of mind with the present applicant and other accused persons, which shows that they conspired together to commit the murder of the deceased. He would also submit that the other co- accused persons, namely Satya Narayan @ Chhotu, Ajay @ Ajju and Vinod Shrivas have been released on bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is also similar to them. She being a lady and in jail since 11.06.2024, final adjudication of the case will take its own time, therefore, she may also be enlarged on bail. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants and would submit that in the memorandum statement of the applicants, the entire story and the manner in which they conspired together to commit the murder of the deceased for which they prepared, they managed the Salphaz tablet, implanted it in cigarette and given it to the deceased and when he started smoking by that cigarette, with the influence of the poison, he died. It's a pre-planned murder, after having conspired with the other accused persons. The applicant- Shivam Sahu has brought the Salphaz tablet and from his possession, one cigarette packet having 03 pieces of cigarette, powder of Salphaz tablet and one mobile phone has been seized and from the FSL report, the seized cigarette was contained with Aluminium Phosphide (Salphaz) which was the cause of death of the deceased and thereby there is direct nexus of the applicant- Shivam Sahu with the offence in question. The applicant- Pooja Shrivas is the wife of the deceased and she was having motive to commit the murder of the deceased as it reflects from the memorandum statement of the accused persons, that she was having 5 relation with co-accused Rakesh Shrivas and in order to eliminate her husband, she conspired with the other accused persons and they committed his murder. From the applicant- Pooja Shrivas, her mobile phone, TV and home theater have been seized and from the call detail obtained with respect to the mobile phones seized in the case, it reveals that they have actively connected at the relevant point of time with each other through their mobile phones, which also supports the conspiracy between them. From the 161 CRPC statement of the witnesses, the involvement of the applicants in the crime in question is