Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 13795 (CHH)

DEVENDRA CHANDRAKAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/2163/2025 · 2025-03-19

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:13198 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2163 of 2025 1 - Devendra Chandrakar S/o Lup Singh Chandrakar Aged About 22 Years R/o Sokhatal Chowki Khandsara, Police Station Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Chowki Khandsara, Police Station Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aman Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate. For Non-applicant(s) : Mr. Atanu Ghosh, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 19/03/2025 1. This is the third bail application of the applicant, who has been arrested in the offence of Crime No. 435/2024 registered at Police Station Bemetara, Out Post Khandsara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. The first bail application of the applicant is dismissed as withdrawn after arguing for some time with liberty to revive his prayer for bail after examination of the prosecutrix as well as the witnesses of the school record, vide order dated 26-11-2024 passed in MCrC No. 7425/2024. The second bail application of the applicant is also dismissed vide order dated 31-01-2025 passed in MCrC No. 886/2025, 2 considering that some of the witnesses are yet to be examined and there was no change in circumstances. Thereafter, the present third bail application is filed by the applicant. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in the case, the prosecutrix, her father, her grandmother and the school teacher have been examined and from the evidence it appears that the ingredients of the offence of kidnapping and rape are missing. The applicant is in jail since 17- 08-2024 and the final adjudication of the case will take its own time, therefore he may be enlarged on bail. 3. On the other hand, learned state counsel opposed and submitted that earlier, two bail applications are dismissed, the trial of the case is in progress, and medical evidence is yet to be examined. Therefore, his third bail application is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, further considering that the other material witnesses are yet to be examined, I do not find any substantive change in circumstances in the case and therefore, the third bail application of the applicant is rejected at the motion stage itself. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.04.02 18:27:28 +0530