Advocates:
['SHAILENDRA DUBEY', '', 'HIMANSHU KUMAR SHARMA', 'A G']

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

MCRC No. 6997 of 2017

•

Govind Singh S/o Late Sadan Singh, Aged About 48 Years R/o Village

Salka, Police Station And Tahsil Khadgawan, District Korea, Chhattisgarh

----Applicant

Versus

•

State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station

Khadgawan, District Korea, Chhattisgarh

---- Respondent

For Applicant

:

Shri Shailendra Dubey, Advocate

For Respondent-State

:

Shri S.K. Mishra, PL for the State

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

Order On Board

28/11/2017

1. This is the Second Bail Application filed under Section 439 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been

arrested on 2-11-2016 in connection with Crime No. 177 of 2016, registered

at Police Station Khadgawan, District Korea (CG) for the offence punishable

under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 294 & 435 of the IPC.

2. The Firs Bail Application was dismissed on merits on 03.01.2017.

3. As per prosecution case, a report was lodged by one Smt. Mamta Choubey

on 2-11-2016 at 9.30 a.m., that she had purchased the land at village Salka

and on the date of incident i.e., 2-11-2016 she along with her brother-in-law

Rajendra Choubey and her driver went to her land wherein Ram Vichar

Kewat sowed harvest, he was advised not to do as the land was purchased

by them. When it was objected, at that time, Ram Vichar Kewat, his family

2

members and present applicants Govind Singh and Ajay Singh along with

other co-accused persons abused them and started assaulting the

complainant. During such course, Rajendra Choubey, brother-in-law of the

complainant was caught hold by present applicants Govind Singh and Ajay

Singh and other accused persons assaulted him by way of axe.

Subsequently complainant was also caught hold by the present applicants

and she was assaulted by way of sickle and thereafter vehicle of the

complainant i.e., Safari CG-15-B-1177 was set to fire and thereby the

aforesaid offence was committed.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that after rejection of the

earlier bail application on 03.01.2017, the charge-sheet has been filed and

the injured was hospitalized only for 5 days, therefore, no offence is made

out against the applicant and he may be enlarged on bail.

5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

6. Perused the earlier bail rejection order dated 03.01.2017 by which the bail

was dismissed on merits. Considering the same I do not find any charge of

circumstances to reconsider this repeat bail application. It is accordingly

dismissed.

Sd/-

Goutam Bhaduri

Judge

Ashu