Setu Ram and Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court 25 Apr 2006 M. Criminal C. No. 467 of 2006 (2006) 04 CHH CK 0013
Bench: Division Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

M. Criminal C. No. 467 of 2006

Hon'ble Bench

Sunil Kumar Sinha, J

Advocates

Sameer Singh, for the Appellant; Sudhir Bajpai, for the Respondent

Final Decision

Allowed

Acts Referred
  • Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 438
  • Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 147, 294, 323, 452, 506
  • Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(x)

Judgement Text

Translate:

Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.@mdashHeard.

2. This is an application filed u/s 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicants, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 175/2005 registered at Police Station Sahaspur, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 294, 506, 323, 147 of I.P.C. and section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989,

3. At the very outset, learned State Counsel submits that an offence u/s 3(l)(x) of the S.C. and S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was registered against two other co-accused persons Manhar Ram and Inder and such offence has not been registered against the present applicants because they also belong to Gond caste.

4. So far as the case of the prosecution is concerned, learned State Counsel submits that on 02.11.2005 all the accused persons entered into the house of the complainant namely Latmar and they assaulted his brother Dhaniram.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that except section 452 all other sections of the I.P.C. are bailable. He submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He prays for releasing the applicants on bail.

6. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, particularly considering the circumstance that except section 452 all other sections under the I.P.C. are bailable, I am of the opinion that present is a fit case to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail.

8. Their application filed u/s 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

9. It is directed that in the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs. 5000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the officer arresting them.

10. This order shall remain in force for a period of 45 days, during which, the applicants may apply for regular bail before the concerned court.

C.C. as per rules.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More