LINGARAM KODOPI Vs. STATE OF CHHATISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although in view of our order, dated 1st November, 2013, the relevant record has been produced, but no responsible officer familiar with the record, who could assist the Court in examining the same is present. Only some police officers who are unable to assist the Court have produced the record. Mr. V.A. Mohta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Chhatisgarh, has submitted that no officer could attend as they are all on election duty. He, therefore, seeks an adjournment for two weeks, so that the concerned officer can attend the proceedings.

(2.) It has been stated by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioner-Lingaram Kodopi-in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 7898 of 2013 has been in custody since 9th September, 2011 and the Petitioner-Soni Sori in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 7913 of 2013 has been in custody since 4th October, 2011. Since it is going to take some time before a responsible officer can be present in Court in assisting the examination of the record, we are of the opinion that it would be unjust to continue the incarceration of the Petitioners during the pendency of the applications for bail. We are also mindful of the fact that Soni Sori, Petitioner in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 7913 of 2013 has been acquitted in five earlier cases. Similarly, Petitioner Lingaram Kodopi in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 7898 of 2013 was also acquitted in the earlier matter. It has also been stated that B.K. Lala, co-accused has also been granted bail on 4th February, 2012. In these circumstances, we are of the opinion that it would be appropriate to direct that the Petitioners be released on interim bail during the pendency of the bail applications. However, keeping in view the submissions made by Mr. V.A. Mohta, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Chhatisgarh, it would be in the interests of justice to direct that the Petitioners shall not enter the State of Chhatisgarh during the period in which they are granted interim bail. It is ordered accordingly.

(3.) At this stage, it has been brought to our notice by Mr. Colin Gonsalves, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner in Special Leave petition (Criminal) No. 7913 of 2013 and Mr. Prashant Bhushan, teamed counsel appearing for the Petitioner in Special Leave petition (Criminal) No. 7898 of 2013 that the Petitioners have not met their families for a long time and it would be only humane if they are permitted to meet their families before they travel to Delhi.