JAY KISHOR SINGH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is first bail application seeking grant of regular bail to the Applicant who is in jail since 5/2/2024 in connection with Crime No.17/2024 registered at Police Station Bhatti Thana, District Durg for the offence punishable under Ss. 307, 324, 326, 201, 34 IPC and Ss. 25 and 27 of Arms Act.

(2.) The prosecution story in brief is that on 1/2/2024 at about 19:30 hours the victim Rajat Pratap Singh has lodged report to the Police against the present applicant and other co-accused alleging in it that he married with the daughter of co-accused Ranveer Singh and after some time of marriage dispute arose between them and today i.e. on 1/2/2024 at about 3:30 p.m. when she was going to her parents house he tried to convince and followed her. At that time at Sector-4 Street No.29, his father-in-law Ranveer Singh and his uncle-in-law Ranjeet and brother-in-law Jay kishore came there armed with sword and danda and started assaulting him. The appolicant gave blow by sword on his head. His uncle-in-law Ranjeet Singh assulted him on Danda on his leg. When he tried to save himself, his father-in-law took the sword from his brother-in-law (applicant herein) and made assault on his neck by the sword which inflicted on his shoulder. By the assault made by the accused persons, he received multiple injuries. The incident was seen by Shailendra Thakur and Jagdish Gond, who rescued him and he was admitted to Sector-9 Hospital, Bhilai. The offence has been registered in which the applicant has been arrested.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant is relative of victim. In the FIR, two eye-witnesses Shailendra Thakur and Jagdish Gond have been named, but they have not supported the prosecution's case. Query number-4 mentioned in Annexure A/5 with regard to presence of human blood in the clothes seized from the applicant has not been answered by the doctor. The complainant and his family members tortured the sister of applicant due to which a community meeting was held on 3/1/2024 in which they convinced to bury their dispute, yet the same had been made cause to the present incident. The applicant was not present at the place of incident at 3:30 PM which is the time of alleged incident. From the evidence of PW-2 and PW-9, his presence is also not there. In the medical report though there is no fracture in the CT Scan of the victim and the same is a prepared document as the father of victim himself is a doctor in the said hospital. He would further submit that there is inconsistencies in the evidence of witnesses who have been examined before the trial court and they have not supported the version of each other. An afterthought allegations have been levelled against the applicant that he assaulted the victim by sword. The applicant is in jail since 5/2/2024 and out of 21 witnesses only 11 witnesses have been examined till date, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail as final adjudication may take sometime.