Chattisgarh High Court
Kunjram Jangde & Others vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 December, 2021
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Order Sheet
CRA No. 689 of 2017
1. Kunjram Jangde S/o Late Sundarwa Jangde, aged about 60 years, R/o Village
Bodsara, At Present Village- Kaneri, Police Station- Chakarbhatha, District-
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
2. Bundaram Jangde S/o Late Sundarwa Jangde, aged about 56 years R/o Village
Bodsara, At Present Village- Kaneri, Police Station- Chakarbhatha, District-
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
3. Chandraprakash Jangde @ Chandu S/o Bundram Hangde, aged about 25 years
R/o Village Bodsara, At Present Village- Kaneri, Police Station- Chakarbhatha,
District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
4. Hariram Janjgde S/o Kunjram Janjgde, aged about 25 years R/o Village Bodsara,
At Present Village- Kaneri, Police Station- Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh
5. Bholu Dhritlahre S/o Sarju Dhritlahre, aged about 28 years, R/o Village Bodsara,
At Present Village- Kaneri, Police Station- Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh
6. Ishwar Jangde S/o Kunjram Jangde, aged about 19 years, R/o Village- Kaneri,
Police Station- Chakarbhatha, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
7. Nayandas Jangde @ Chainudas S/o Bundram Jangde, aged about 23 years, R/o
Village- Kaneri, Police Station- Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
8. Heeradas Jangde S/o Kunjram Jangde, aged about 38 years, R/o Village- Kaneri,
Police Station- Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
9. Jhukam Bai W/o Late Sundarwa @ Sunderlal Jangde, aged about 78 years R/o
Village- Kaneri, Police Station- Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
---- Appellants
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through The Station House Officer, Police Station
Chakarbhatha, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
WITH
CRA No. 722 of 2017
1. Mukundram @ Mukunda S/o Sundarwa Jangde, aged about 50 years, R/o Village
Kaneri, Police Station Chakarbhatha, District: Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
2. Kashiram Jangde S/o Mukundram Jangde, aged about 21 Years R/o Village
Kaneri, Police Station: Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
---- Appellants
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station: Chakarbhatha, District: Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
WITH
CRA No. 725 of 2017
1. Gendram Jangade S/o Late Sundarwa Jangade, aged about 40 years R/o Village
Kaneri, Police Station Chakarbhatha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
2. Santosh Kumar Jangade, S/o Late Lala Ram Jangade, aged about 40 Years R/o
Village Kaneri, Police Station Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
3. Shashi Kapoor S/o Santosh Kumar Jangade, aged about 23 years R/o Village
Kaneri, Police Station: Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
4. Chitra Kumar Jangade, S/o Gendram Jangade, aged about 20 years R/o Village
Kaneri, Police Station Chakarbhatha, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
---- Appellants
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh through Police Station Chakarbhatha, District Bilaspur,
Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
20.12.2021 Ms. Sharmila Singhai, Senior Advocate along with Mr.
Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Counsel for the appellants.
Mr. Devesh Verma, G.A. for the State/Respondent.
Heard I.A. No.1/2021 (in CRA No.689 of 2017, for appellant
No.4 namely Hariram Jangde and Appellant No.8 namely Heeradas
Jangde) and I.A. No.1/2021 (in CRA No.725 of 2017, for appellant
No.1 namely Gendram Jangade and Appellant No.2 namely Santosh
Kumar Jangade), both the applications for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail to the respective appellants.
By the impugned judgment date 09.03.2017 passed in Session
Trial No.31/2016 by learned Sixth Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur,
(C.G.), the appellants stands convicted as mentioned below:
Conviction Sentence In Default
U/s 148 of IPC RI for 1 year with a fine In default of payment of
amount of Rs.100/- fine amount additional
RI for 1 month.
U/s 452 read RI for 1 year with a fine In default of payment of
with Section 149 amount of Rs.100/- fine amount additional
of IPC RI for 1 month.
U/s 427 of IPC RI for 6 months None.
U/s 302 read For life imprisonment In default of payment of
with Section 149 and fine of Rs.100/- fine amount additional
RI for 1 month.
U/s 323 read RI for 6 months with a In default of payment of
with Section 149 fine amount of Rs.300/- fine amount additional
of IPC RI for 1 month. (Four
times).
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that these
appellants are not the main assailants in the incident that has
occurred. The main assailants in the incident according to the eye
witness Ramnarayan (PW-11), who is an independent witness are
Kunjram Jangde and Bundram Jangde (Appellant No.1 and 2
respectively in CRA No.689 of 2017). Similarly placed co-
accused/appellants in CRA No.689 of 2017 namely; No.3
Chandraprakash Jangde @ Chandu, No.5 Bholu Dhritlahre, No.6
Ishwar Jangde and No.7 Narayandas Jangde @ Chainudas; both the
appellants of CRA No.722 of 2017 namely; Mukundram @ Mukunda
and Kashiram Jangde; and the appellants of CRA No.725 of 2017
namely; No.3 Shashi Kapoor and No.4 Chitra Kumar Jangade of CRA
No.727 of 2017 have been granted bail by this bench by previous
order dated 10.08.2021, therefore, these appellants are also entitled
for grant of bail on account of parity. Hence, it is prayed that their
application may be allowed.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed
the bail applications and submitted that there are six eye witnesses
namely Ramnarayan (PW-11), Agamdas Sonwani (PW-5), Motilal
Jangde (PW-9), Smt. Chana Bai (PW-10), Ku. Mamta (PW-13) and
Manju Kumar Sonwani (PW-16), they have clearly stated about the
present appellants' participation along with the other appellants in the
incident, causing death of the deceased Mannu Lal, therefore, there is
evidence present to show the intention and common object of the
appellants in the commission of offence which is committed in this
case, therefore, the applications are no fit to be allowed.
Heard both the parties and perused the record of the Trial Court.
Considered on the submissions. On the basis of the analogy
that has been drawn in the previous order dated 10.08.2021 by this
Court, these appellants appear to be placed on the similar footing on
which the other appellants have been granted bail by the previous
order, therefore, we are of the considered opinion that these appellants
should and also be enlarged on bail.
Hence, I.A. No.1/2021 (in CRA No.689 of 2017, for appellant
No.4 namely Hariram Jangde and Appellant No.8 namely Heeradas
Jangde) and I.A. No.1/2021 (in CRA No.725 of 2017, for appellant
No.1 namely Gendram Jangade and Appellant No.2 namely Santosh
Kumar Jangade), both the applications for suspension of sentence and
grant of bail to the respective appellants are allowed.
Execution of substantive jail sentences imposed upon the above
mentioned appellants shall remain suspended during the pendency of
this appeal and they shall be released on bail on each of them
executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent
surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 08.02.2022. They
shall thereafter appear before the Trial Court on a date to be given by
the Registry of this Court and shall continue to appear there on all
such subsequent dates as are given to them by the said Court, till the
disposal of this appeal.
List these cases for final hearing in due course.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) (Arvind Singh Chandel)
Judge Judge
Saurabh
