Chattisgarh High Court
Tarachand Kashyap vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 January, 2025
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No. 1654 of 2024
Suraj Verma S/o Shri Puranlal Verma Aged About 21 Years R/o Gram
Pendri, Ward No. 6, Pamgarh, District - Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh
--- Appellant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station -
Reserved Center Pamgarh, District - Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh
--- Respondent
CRA No. 1189 of 2024
Mithlesh Verma S/o Hulasram Verma, Aged About 27 Years R/o Village-
Pendri, Ward No. 06, Pamgarh, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
---Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station-
Pamgarh, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
--- Respondent
Digitally
signed by
VEDPRAKASH
DEWANGAN
1 - Ajay Kumar Verma S/o Dujram Verma Aged About 25 Years R/o Village
Pendri, Ward No.4, Pamgarh, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Jitendra Kumar Verma S/o Dujram Verma Aged About 27 Years R/o
Village Pendri, Ward No.4, Pamgarh, District- Janjgir-Champa,
Chhattisgarh.
3 - Vijay Kumar Verma S/o Dujram Verma Aged About 20 Years R/o Village
Pendri, Ward No. 4, Pamgarh, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.
---Appellants
Versus
The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pamgarh, District-
Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.
--- Respondent
Tarachand Kashyap S/o Rajesh Kashyap Aged About 18 Years Age 18
Years 15 Days, R/o Ward No. 2, Kurmipara, P.S. Pamgarh, Dist.- Janjgir-
Champa (C.G.)
---Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho Of Police Station Pamgarh, Dist.-
Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)
--- Respondent
(Cause title taken from Case Information System)
Order Sheet
09/01/2025 Ms. Deepali Pandey, Advocate, Mr. P. Chetan Kumar,
Advocate, Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate and Mr. Pallav Mishra,
Advocate for the respective appellants.
Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy A.G. for the
State.
By the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence
dated 19.06.2024, passed in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2022, by
the Court of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Janjgir,
District Janjgir-Champa, the present appellants have been
convicted and sentenced as under:
Conviction Sentence
U/s. 148 of IPC R.I. for 02 years and fine of Rs.
1000/-, in default of payment of
fine additional R.I. for 01
month.
U/s. 302/149 of IPC R.I. for life and fine of Rs.
5000/-, in default of payment of
fine additional R.I. for 01 year.
U/s. 307/149 of IPC R.I. for 07 years and fine of Rs.
5000/-, in default of payment of
fine additional R.I. for 06
months.
(All the sentences are directed to run concurrently)
Heard on I.As. No. 1 of 2024, which are applications for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail, in all the appeals.
Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that
the alleged incident is occurred in a Mela place, where the
crowd was gathered. When the complainant party and the
accused persons were enjoying the Mela, while enjoying the
'Ravat Naach', some pushing and shoving took place due to
the overcrowded situation and then altercation started between
the parties, which culminated into free fight between two
groups. The injured persons were taken to hospital, but one of
the injured- Maheshwar has died on the way to CIMS, Bilaspur
and then the FIR has been registered against the appellants.
The allegations against the appellants are that they assaulted
the deceased as well as other injured persons by hand and fist,
danda and the appellant Ajay Verma has assaulted by knife.
There was no motive to commit murder of the deceased. There
are material omissions and contradictions in the evidence of
the witnesses PW-1/Rajeshwar, PW-2/Dilsingh, PW-3/Baliram
Yadav, PW-4/Jagdishwar @ Jagdish Prasad and
PW-5/Kaliram. The witnesses are interested witnesses and
therefore their statements are not fully reliable. They would
further submit that even if the entire case of the prosecution is
taken on its face value, the case would not travel beyond
Section 304 of IPC. The appellants, accept Ajay Verma, were
on bail during the trial and presently they are in jail since the
date of judgment i.e. 19.06.2024. They were not misused the
liberty granted to them. The appellant- Ajay Verma is in jail
since 24.12.2021. The appeal is likely to take a couple of years
or even more in its final disposal. Hence, they pray that the
appellants may be enlarged on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for
grant of bail. He would submit that there are injured witnesses
PW-1, PW-2 and PW-5 and other eyewitnesses to the incident.
Motive need not be proved in case of sudden provocation.
There cannot be any hard and fast rule that evidence of
interested witnesses cannot be taken into consideration.
Looking to the manner in which they have assaulted the
deceased as well as the injured witnesses, the appellants are
not entitled for bail.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record of the case.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
the nature of allegation and evidence of the injured witnesses
PW-1, PW-2 and PW-5 and also the other witnesses, the
incident occurred at Mela place during the celebrating of
'Ravat Naach' and since the place was overcrowded, the
altercation started due to pushing and shoving and there was
no premeditation and the incident occurred in the heat of
passion and sudden provocation, in which the marpeet started
between two groups by lathi, hand and fist and Ajay has
assaulted by knife. Even if the entire case is taken on its face
value, it appears that it is not a planned murder. The appellants
were on bail during the trial and are in jail since 19.06.2024 i.e.
from the date of judgment and the appellant- Ajay Verma is in
jail since 24.12.2021, final adjudication of the appeal will take
its own time, we deem it appropriate to allow the application for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail moved on behalf of
the appellants.
Accordingly, the substantive jail sentence awarded to
appellants- Suraj Verma, Mithlesh Verma, Ajay Kumar
Verma, Jitendra Kumar Verma, Vijay Kumar Verma and
Tarachand Kashyap by the learned trial Court is hereby
suspended. They shall be released on bail on their executing
personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety each of the like
sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their
appearance before the Registry of this Court on 18.02.2025.
They 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 them by the said Court, interval being not less than 6
months, till final disposal of this appeal.
Consequently, I.As. No. 1 of 2024 filed by appellants are
allowed.
It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove
are only confined for disposal of aforesaid I.As. filed in this
appeal and it shall not be construed as an expression of
opinion of this Court on the merits of the matter.
List this matter for final hearing.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)
Judge Chief Justice
ved
