HIRAMAN YADAV Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Anticipating arrest in connection with crime No. 16/2001 of police station Gurrur District Durg, for offence punishable under Section 302/ 201 I.P.C. the applicant has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr. P.C.

(2.) Miss. Singhai, learned counsel for the State submits that from the statements of Satnand Sahu and Shankar Sinha, it would appear that the applicant is involved in commission of the murder of the deceased Dhadhuram, the applicant does not deserve an order in his favour.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant submits that from the statements of these two witnesses it would not appear that the applicant has committed any crime. From the statements of Sahu it only appears that the present applicant used to give advise to Dhadhuram that he should not earn fight with another person namely Arun, beyond this the prosecution has not collected any further evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged crime.