Chattisgarh High Court
Laamu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 March, 2025
Author: Rajani Dubey
Bench: Rajani Dubey
1
2025:CGHC:14253-DB
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
CRA No.1331 of 2019
1 - Laamu S/o Late Rameshwar Tilakwar Aged About 27 Years R/o
Digitally
signed by
Village Bairak, Police Station Bodla, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh
RAMAKANT
NIRALA
Appellant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bodla, District-
Kabirdham(Kawardha), Chhattisgarh
Respondent(s)
For Appellant : Mr. Sunil Verma, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Ajay Pandey, GA
Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput
Order on Board
25/03/2025
Per Rajani Dubey J.
1. Heard on IA No.3/2019, application dated 05.11.2019 seeking
permission to withdraw the appeal.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he filed this
appeal before this Court upon instructions of the
accused/appellant Laamu Tilakwar against the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence dated 18.06.2015 and after
filing this appeal, it came to his knowledge that the appellant has
escaped from the Jail at Kawardha and he has no instructions
from the appellant, therefore, he wants to withdraw this appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has also filed affidavit in
support of this application.
4. This Court on 03.08.2022, 01.09.2022, 04.08.2023 and
14.09.2023 issued non bailable warrant of arrest and direction to
the Superintendent of Police, Superintendent of Jail for
production of the appellant. On 16.10.2023, a report was called
from the concerned jail as to what steps have been taken
regarding arrest of the appellant Lamu Tilakwar. On 30.11.2023
again, report was called from the Director General, Jail after
conducting enquiry as to what steps have been taken for arrest of
the appellant. On 11.01.2024 again a fresh report was called
from the Director General (Jail). On 09.07.2024 again, fresh
report was called from the Director General (Jail) and on
21.08.2024, Director General (Jail) was directed to file his own
affidavit as to what steps have been taken by him to arrest the
appellant.
5. Again on 19.02.2025, the Director General, Jail was directed to
file is own affidavit as to what steps have been taken to arrest the
appellant who has been absconding since 29.06.2015. On
13.03.2025, Mr. Himanshu Gupta filed his affidavit/report in
compliance of the order dated 13.03.2025 and as per report, the
appellant Lamu Tilakwar was absconding from Kawardha Jail
since 29.06.2015 with one Kewaldas Manikpuri and after some
time Kewaldas Manikpuri was arrested but the appellant Lamu
Tilakwar could not be arrested despite several efforts being made
and as per rojnamchasanha dated 06.01.2025 and 10.01.2025,
since 2015 no one heard about him and nobody knows his
address and no property belongs to the accused as per report of
the competent officer.
6. It is clear from the record of this appeal that this appeal was filed
on 11.09.2019 and as per record of jail and affidavit of competent
officer, the appellant was absconding from jail since 2015.
Learned counsel for the appellant also stated that he filed this
appeal on instructions of the mother of the appellant Lamu
Tilakwar namely mother Smt. Khilauna Bai, who was also co-
accused in ST No.52/2014, in which the appellant Lamu and the
co-accused Khilauna Bai were convicted by the learned Trial
Court. Learned counsel also stated that he had no knowledge
that the accused Lamu was absconding from jail since 2015 and
when he knew about the same, he immediately filed this
application to withdraw this appeal. Learned counsel also
submitted that the co-accused Khilauna Bai also filed CRA
No.1067/2015 before this Court, in which this Court passed
judgment on 04.08.2023 and she was acquitted by this Court, but
she had no knowledge of whereabouts of the accused Lamu
Tilakwar.
7. It is clear from all material available on record that the appellant
Lamu was absconding from jail since 2015 and this appeal was
filed in the year 2019 without instructions of the appellant Lamu
and as per affidavit and other documents filed by the police
authorities, it is clear that for 9 years, no one heard about the
accused Lamu and the learned counsel for the appellant also
submitted that he is unable to argue the matter in absence of
instructions by the appellant. He is also not sure whether the
appellant is alive or not and for 9 years, no one heard about him.
8. Under the aforesaid circumstances, this application is allowed.
Consequently, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty
in favour of the appellant that he may file appeal in future, if he so
desires.
Sd/- Sd/-
Rajani Dubey Sachin Singh Rajput
Judge Judge
Nirala
