Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Sharad Kumar Gupta, J.
Rameshwar Nishad S/o Gariba Nishad – Applicant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through its Police Station Nandni Nagar – Respondent
M. Cr. C. No. 308 of 2018
Decided On : 16-02-2018
Bail Application - Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. - Rejection of bail application based on severity of injuries and lack of change in circumstances from previous application
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a second bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's case stated that the applicant caused grievous injuries to the complainant with an axe, and the doctor's report indicated that the injuries could have been fatal if not treated in time.
Finding of the Court:
The Court, after considering the case diary and arguments from both parties, rejected the bail application, citing the severity of the injuries and the lack of change in circumstances from the previous rejected bail application.
Issues: The main issue was whether the severity of the injuries and the lack of change in circumstances warranted granting bail to the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The severity of the injuries and the lack of change in circumstances from the previous rejected bail application influenced the Court's decision to reject the present bail application.
Final Decision: The Court rejected the present bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.
1. This is second bail application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. preferred by the applicant before this Court. No other bail application is pending before any other Court.
2. Perused the Case Diary provided by the learned counsel for the State in connection with Crime No. 113/2017 registered at Police Station-Nandni Nagar, Civil and Revenue District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Case of the prosecution, in brief is that on 02.05.2017 at 8 am at village Lahanga, applicant caused injuries on the body of the complainant Ajit Banjare on his neck and back by an axe. As per injury report, two lacerated wounds were found on neck and back caused by hard and blunt object. The injuries were grievous in nature.
4. In the query report, the doctor has written that if the injuries were not treated in time, the injured could have died due to excessive bleeding.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the doctor-Shushma Gond, PW-4 has been examined in the Trial Court as prosecution witness. In M.L.C. and query reports, the doctor has mentioned that the injuries could have been caused by hard and blunt object, there is no injury on the vital part of the injured, thus, he may be released on bail.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.
7. Earlier, the first bail application of the applicant has been rejected by this Court on 03.11.2017 in MCRC No. 4989 of 2017 considering the merits of the case.
8. Mere examination of the doctor, mentioning the hard and blunt object in M.L.C. report as well as query report do not change the circumstance which may entitle the applicant to get regular bail in second round.
9. Looking to the entire materials available on record, this Court is not inclined to give benefit of Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. to the applicant.
10. Consequently, the present bail application is rejected.
11. Certified copy as per rules.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
