Chattisgarh High Court
Padam Singh @ Rahul Rajput vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 29 April, 2025
1
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 2158 of 2023
Padam Singh @ Rahul Rajput S/o Ramsingh Rajput Aged About 26
Years Resident Of Village-Khirkiya, Thana - Chhipabad, District
Harda (M.P.)
... Appellant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Police Station Fingeshwar,
District - Gariyaband Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
Order Sheet
Digitally
29/04/2025 Heard Mr. Bhuvneshwar Singh Rajput, learned
RAJSHEKHAR signed by
SONI RAJSHEKHAR
SONI
counsel for the appellant and Ms. Ankita Shukla,
learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the
respondent/State on IA No. 04 of 2025, which is an
application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking
modification of the conditions in the order dated
07.03.2025, granting bail to the appellant, and IA No.
05 of 2025 which is an application for exemption from
filing an affidavit in support of the 'applicant for
modification in order dated 07.03.2025'.
IA No. 05 of 2025 is Allowed.
The appellant was granted bail by order of this
Court dated 07.03.2025 with the condition to execute
bail bond to the satisfaction of the concerned trial
Court for his appearance before the Registry of this
Court on 15.04.2025. He shall thereafter appear
before the concerned 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 him by the said Court, interval being not less
than 6 months, till final disposal of this appeal.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the appellant is poor person and the financial
condition of his family is not good, and therefore, he
is unable to comply with the conditions stipulated by
this Court in order dated 07.03.2025 while granting
bail to him and, therefore, he could not be released
on bail. He relied on the order dated 29.03.2022
passed in CRA No.1239 of 2019 (Pardeshi @
Ratiram @ Raturam and others vs. State of
Chhattisgarh) wherein this Court relying on the
judgments of Supreme Court in the cases of Moti
Ram and others vs. State of M.P. reported in (1978)
4 SCC 47 and Hussainara Khatoon and others (I)
vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar reported in
(1980) 1 SCC 81 directed the appellants therein to be
released on bail on executing only personal bond of
Rs.25,000/- for the like amount to the satisfaction of
the trial Court and exempted other conditions
stipulated earlier while granting bail to the appellants
therein. Hence, praying similar direction modification
in the order dated 07.03.2025 is prayed for.
Learned State counsel has no objection. He
further submits that the issue of enlarging
accused/convict on his executing only personal bond
has been elaborately dealt with by this Court in the
case of Bhawan Singh and others vs. State of
Chhattisgarh (CRA No.1607 of 2015), order dated
11.05.2022, wherein this Court after considering the
principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court in
the cases of Moti Ram (supra) and Hussainara
Khatoon (supra) in great detail coupled with other
provisions of law directed the appellants therein to be
released on his executing only personal bond, which
direction can also be issued in the present case.
Having heared the learned counsel of the
parties, taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of the case and specially considering
the fact that the appellant being poor person and the
financial condition of this family is not good,
therefore, he is unable to comply with the conditions
stipulated by this Court in order dated 07.03.2025
while granting bail to him and in view of decisions of
the Supreme Court in the matters of Moti Ram
(supra) and Hussainara Khatoon (supra) as well as
the order of this Court passed in the case of Bhawan
Singh (supra), we deem it appropriate to direct that
the appellant- Padam Singh @ Rahul Rajput be
released on bail on his executing only a personal
bond to the satisfaction of the trial Court concerned
and shall appear before the Registry of this Court on
27th of June, 2025. He shall thereafter appear before
the concerned 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
him by the said Court, interval being not less than 6
months, till the disposal of this appeal.
Accordingly, order dated 07.03.2025 is modified
to the extent indicated above.
IA No.04 of 2025 is allowed.
A copy of this order be communicated to the
concerned jail authorities.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rajshekhar
