Shatrughan Kosle vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3653 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Shatrughan Kosle vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 15 April, 2025

                                                                            NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                  CRA No. 1038 of 2024

    Shatrughan Kosle S/o Shri Jhanglu Kosle Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Bahna
    Kadi, Police Station Mandir Hasaud, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Appellant

                                          versus

    State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Mandir Hasaud,
    District Raipur (C.G.)                                       ... Respondent

(Cause title is taken from the CIS)

Order Sheet

15.04.2025 Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, counsel for the appellant.

Ms Sunita Sahu, PL for the State.

Heard on IA-1 of 2024, application for suspension of sentence

and grant of bail.

Appellant has been convicted by the judgment of conviction

and order of sentence dated 17.05.2024 passed in Session Trial

No.264 of 2021 by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur,

District-Raipur, CG for the offence punishable under Section 304

part-II of the IPC, and sentenced RI for 10 years with fine of Cra 1038 of 2024

Rs.3,000/-with default stipulation.

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the

appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence.

There is no eyewitness to the incident, and the case of the

prosecution is based on only memorandum and seizure of the 'crow-

bar' from the appellant. There is no witness who have seen the

appellant on the spot. It is only on the ground that there is property

dispute between the parties, the appellant has been implicated in the

case. Applicant is on bail during trial. Presently he is in jail since

17.05.2024, and this appeal would take its own time for its final

adjudication, therefore, appellant may be enlarged on bail.

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail

application, and submits that there was property dispute between the

parties day before the incident. There was 'marpit' between the

appellant and the deceased, as he had tried to encroach the land of

the deceased, by which quarrel took place, and he was assaulted by

the 'crow-bar', which was seized on the memorandum of appellant.

Blood found in the FSL report on the 'crow-bar' and clothes of the

appellant, for which no explanation has been made by the appellant.

Therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

Cra 1038 of 2024

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record

of the trial Court.

Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the

parties, nature of evidence produced by the prosecution, further

considering the evidence of PW2, wife of the deceased, and that

day before the date of incident, there was ' marpit' between the

appellant and deceased, the evidence with respect to the motive to

commit murder and also the fact that on the memorandum statement

of the appellant, 'crow-bar' has been seized, further considering the

nature of injuries found on the body of the deceased, this Court is

not inclined to allow the application for suspension of sentence and

grant of bail to the appellant.

Accordingly, IA-1 of 2024 is rejected.

List this case for final hearing after eight weeks.

In view of above, application for urgent hearing stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE

padma