REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 727 of 2015 Balwan Singh …Appellant Versus The State of Chhattisgarh and Anr. …Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1197 of 2016 Latel Ram & Anr. …Appellants Versus State of Chhattisgarh …Respondent J U D G M E N T MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, J. These appeals arise out of the judgment dated 10.02.2015 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal 1
No. 178 of 2011 and Criminal Appeal No. 179 of 2011 confirming the judgment and order of conviction dated 20.01.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur in S.T. No. 57 of 2010 convicting the appellants and other accused for offences punishable under Sections 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, ‘IPC’) and sentencing them accordingly. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on account of previous enmity with Pitambar Singh (since deceased), the Accused No. 1 – Balwan Singh (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 727 of 2015), on 22 nd January, 2007, at evening time, was talking with the other accused regarding preparation to kill Pitambar Singh. Their conversation was heard by Sunderlal Rathore @ Sunder Singh Rathore (PW11) and Shatrughan Singh (PW12), who were passing through the same place. Further, it was the case of the prosecution that all the accused, armed with deadly weapons, went towards the field of one Bhagwat Seth and committed the murder of Pitambar Singh. PW9 and PW16, who were near the scene of the occurrence, rushed to the spot after hearing the cries of the injured, and saw all the accused assaulting the deceased 2
with lathis and tabbal (an agriculture implement made up of iron). It is stated by PW9 and PW16 that the tabbal was held by the Accused No. 4, namely, Ashok Singh. The injured died instantaneously and the accused fled away. The dead body was seen by one Drupad Singh (PW1) at 7 o’clock the next morning, who in turn informed Nar Singh Rajput (PW17), the informant. Thereafter, Drupad Singh and Nar Singh Rajput together went to the place where the dead body was lying, and saw that Pitambar Singh was murdered. The deceased was the uncle of the informant. 3. The Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court, believing the testimonies of PW9 and PW16 who were the eye witnesses of the incident, and the testimonies of PW11 and PW 12 who deposed about the conspiracy to commit the murder of the deceased, convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 148 and 302/149 IPC. It is pertinent to state that although charge was also framed under Section 120B IPC, the accused were acquitted in respect of the said offence. 4. Shri Sanjay Hegde, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant Balwan Singh, and Shri Rajeev Kumar Bansal, learned 3
counsel appearing for appellants Latel Ram and Santu @ Santram, drew the attention of the Court to the relevant portions of the depositions of the important witnesses, and submitted that the prosecution had planted the eye witnesses, namely, PW9 and PW16 for the purpose of prosecuting the accused, though these witnesses were not present near the scene of occurrence. They contended that the statements of these alleged eye witnesses were recorded about eight days after the incident in question, though they were very much present in the village or though the police knew that these witnesses were the alleged eye witnesses of the incident. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, the evidence of PW11 and PW12 is also vague, cryptic, and unreliable inasmuch as the courts below have acquitted the accused for the offence under Section 120B IPC. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the State argued in support of the judgments of the courts below. 6. We find from the records that though the incident took place on 22 nd January, 2007, the statements of the alleged eye witnesses, namely, PW9 and PW16, were recorded after eight days of the incident. The prosecution has tried to explain the 4
delay in recording the statement of the eye witnesses by contending that they were scared of the accused, particularly Balwan Singh who was the village Sarpanch (Panchayat Chairman); the accused Balwan Singh was stated to be powerful and influential; only after some of the accused were arrested, these witnesses came to the village and gave their statements to the police during the course of investigation; till such time, the eye witnesses PW9 and PW16 did not come to the village at all and were staying in different villages in their relatives’ houses. We are conscious of the fact that mere delay in recording of the statement of the eye witness by the investigating officer cannot ipso facto raise suspicion in the mind of the Court about the veracity of the prosecution case, more particularly, about the veracity of the eye witnesses. In the normal course, this Court would have accepted the explanation offered by the witnesses or the prosecution for not recording the statements at an earlier point in time, but the facts in this case are different inasmuch as it is admitted by the prosecution witnesses, more particularly by the investigating officer, that PW9 was very much present in the village. PW2 and the investigating officer, during the course of 5
the investigation, had seen PW9, being the Patel (Patwari) of the village. PW2 had admitted in the crossexamination that he had seen PW9 at the place of the incident when the police had come to the village after the registration of the First Information Report. PW2 is none else but the younger brother of PW9, and they were residing separately in one house. Thus, the evidence of PW 2 cannot be disbelieved insofar as it relates to the presence of PW9 in the village, and on the spot when the police had started investigation. Furthermore, the investigating officer also testified that immediately after reaching the village Semaria, where the incident took place, he had called the Patel (PW9). He categorically admitted that he called PW9 to the place of the occurrence and that he (PW9) was present during the course of the investigation. PW9, being the Patel of the village, could not have kept the fact about the incident or about the complicity of the accused from the investigating officer at the first instance, had he really been an eye witness to the incident. The investigating officer had proceeded to depose that, on his own, he had recorded the statement of PW9 on 30.01.2007, which means that PW9 had not informed the investigating officer that he was an eye witness to the incident. The investigating officer, on his 6
own accord, had recorded the statement of PW9. It is thus clear that the investigating officer knew very well, on the first day itself, that PW9 was an eye witness. There was no reason as to why the investigating officer did not record the statement of the socalled eye witness at the earliest point of time, more particularly when, at that point in time, the investigating officer did not have any clue about the murderers. PW9 and PW16 are close friends, and on the date of the incident, had gone together to see Panthi dance in the village during night, and at that point in time, both of them heard the cries of the deceased and rushed to the spot and saw the accused committing the murder of the deceased. It is also the evidence of PW9 and PW16 that the accused saw these witnesses at the time of the occurrence of the murder inasmuch as these witnesses told all the accused not to beat/assault the deceased. On hearing such utterance of these witnesses, the accused allegedly tried to chase them, but they fled away from the scene. If this were true, then PW9, who was present at the spot during the course of the investigation on the first day itself, would not have left the police uninformed about the presence of PW16 also. 7
It is also relevant to note that PW16 is from a different village, namely, Kusumkonda, which is stated to be 75 K.M. away from the place of incident, and on the date of the incident he had come to the village Semaria where the incident had taken place. The place of work of PW16 is Takatpur, which is stated to be 70 K.M. away from Semaria village. It is curious to note that PW9 and PW16 met on the date of incident after a gap of about 15 years, and thereafter went to watch the dance performance. In our considered opinion, the story, as put forth by the prosecution, that PW9 did not tell the investigating officer about the presence of PW16, is not believable. According to PW16, he came to the village Semaria after eight days, i.e. after the arrest of a few accused, and gave the statement to the police. 7. As per the case of the prosecution, Balwan Singh is a powerful and influential person and the eye witnesses were scared of him. It is relevant to note that even at the time of the recording of the statements of PW9 and PW16 after eight days of the incident, Balwan Singh was not arrested. He was arrested after about two months from the recording of the statements of these witnesses. It is relevant to note that these witnesses were 8
not scared of other accused who were arrested. Be that as it may, we find that the whole story of the prosecution about the presence of PW9 and PW16 on the spot at the time of incident appears to be artificial and concocted. 8. The prosecution also relies upon the evidence relating to recovery of sticks and tabbal which were bloodstained. Such evidence may not be helpful to the prosecution in this case inasmuch as there is no evidence to show that these articles were stained with human blood, and more particularly with blood of the same blood group as that of the deceased. As per the Forensic Science Laboratory Report, the blood stains were disintegrated, and their origin could not be determined. In Sattatiya v. State of Maharashtra , (2008) 3 SCC 210 , one of the crucial factors that had led this Court to reverse the conviction was that the bloodstains on the items seized in the recovery could not be linked with the blood of the deceased. This factor was treated as a serious lacuna in the case of the prosecution. Similarly, in Shantabai and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra , (2008) 16 SCC 354 , the bloodstains on some of 9
the clothes seized from the accused in recovery belonged to a different blood group from that of the blood group of bloodstains found on the clothes of the deceased and on the sample of soil, axe, stones etc. which were taken from the spot by the investigating officer. As a result of this mismatch, it was held that this circumstance was not proved against the accused. It is also important to note the following observations made by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Raghav Prapanna Tripathi & Ors. v. State of U.P. , AIR (1963) SC 74 : “21. In this connection, reference may also be made to circumstances 9 and 10, relating to the recovery of the bloodstained earth from the house. The bloodstained earth has not been proved to be stained with human blood. Again, we are of opinion that it would be farfetched to conclude from the mere presence of bloodstained earth that earth was stained with human blood and that the human blood was of Kamla and Madhusudhan. These circumstances have, therefore, no evidentiary value.” (Emphasis supplied) Therefore, the fivejudge bench had ruled that in that case the prosecution needed to prove that the bloodstains found on the earth or the weapons were of a human origin and were of the same blood group as that of the deceased. 10
9. We are also conscious of the fact that, at times, it may be very difficult for the serologist to detect the origin of the blood due to the disintegration of the serum, or insufficiency of blood stains, or haematological changes etc. In such situations, the Court, using its judicious mind, may deny the benefit of doubt to the accused, depending on the facts and circumstances of each case, if other evidence of the prosecution is credible and if reasonable doubt does not arise in the mind of the Court about the investigation. Thus, in the case of R. Shaji v. State of Kerala , (2013) 14 SCC 266 , this Court had observed: “31. A failure by the serologist to detect the origin of the blood due to disintegration of the serum does not mean that the blood stuck on the axe could not have been human blood at all. Sometimes it is possible, either because the stain is insufficient in itself, or due to haematological changes and plasmatic coagulation, that a serologist may fail to detect the origin of the blood in question. However, in such a case, unless the doubt is of a reasonable dimension which a judicially conscientious mind may entertain with some objectivity, no benefit can be claimed by the accused in this regard. Once the recovery is made in pursuance of a disclosure statement made by 11
the accused, the matching or nonmatching of blood group(s) loses significance.” Similar observations were made by this Court in the case of Gura Singh v. State of Rajasthan , (2001) 2 SCC 205 , wherein it was observed that it was not possible to accept the submission made on behalf of the accused that in the absence of the report regarding the origin of the blood, the accused could not have been convicted, inasmuch as it was only because of the lapse of time that blood could not be classified successfully. In the case of Jagroop Singh v. State of Punjab , (2012) 11 SCC 768 , this Court had ruled that as the recovery was made pursuant to a disclosure statement made by the accused, and the serological report had found that the blood was of human origin, the nondetermination of the blood group had lost its significance. In the case of State of Rajasthan v. Teja Ram and Others , (1999) 3 SCC 507, the Court had observed that the failure of the serologist to detect the origin of the blood, due to disintegration of the serum, did not mean that the blood stuck on the weapon could not have been human blood at all. In this 12
context, it was noted that it could not be said that in all cases where there was a failure in detecting the origin of blood, the circumstance arising from recovery of the weapon would stand relegated to disutility. It was thus observed that unless the doubt was of a reasonable dimension which a judicially conscientious mind entertained with some objectivity, no benefit could be claimed by the accused. 10. However, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the accused would be in a disadvantageous position in case if the aforementioned dictum laid down by this Court in the cases of R. Shaji (supra), Gura Singh (supra), Jagroop Singh (supra) and Teja Ram (supra) relating to the bloodstains is applied in each and every case. Nonconfirmation of bloodgroup or origin of the blood may assume importance in cases where the accused pleads a defence or alleges mala fides on the part of the prosecution, or accuses the prosecution of fabricating the evidence to wrongly implicate him in the commission of the crime. 13
11. In the case of John Pandian v. State Represented by Inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu , (2010) 14 SCC 129 , this Court, on facts, observed that the evidence of recovery of weapons was credible. The Forensic Science Report (FSL) report had disclosed that the blood was of human origin. The Court proceeded to conclude that since the evidence of recovery of weapon was proved to the satisfaction of the Court, it was sufficient that the prosecution had proved that the bloodstains were of human origin, even though the blood group could not be ascertained. 12. The cases discussed above highlight the burden that the prosecution would ordinarily have to discharge, depending on the other facts and circumstances of the case, for the evidence relating to recovery to be considered against the accused. At the same time, as mentioned above, we are conscious of the fact that it may not always be possible to inextricably link the bloodstains on the items seized in recovery to the blood of the deceased, due to the possibility of disintegration of bloodstains on account of the timelapse in carrying out the recovery. For this reason, in Prabhu Dayal v. State of Rajasthan , (2018) 8 SCC 127 , where 14
one of us (Mohan M. Shantanagoudar J.) had the occasion to author the judgment, this Court, relying on Teja Ram (supra), had held that the failure to determine the blood group of the bloodstains collected from the scene of offence would not prove fatal to the case of the prosecution. In Prabhu Dayal case (supra), although the FSL report could not determine the blood group of the bloodstains on account of disintegration, the report clearly disclosed that the bloodstains were of human origin, and the chain of circumstantial evidence was completed by the testimonies of the other witnesses as well as the reports submitted by the Ballistic Expert and the Forensic Science Laboratory regarding the weapon used to commit murder. 13. From the aforementioned discussion, we can summarise that if the recovery of bloodstained articles is proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution, and if the investigation was not found to be tainted, then it may be sufficient if the prosecution shows that the blood found on the articles is of human origin though, even though the blood group is not proved because of disintegration of blood. The Court will have to come to the conclusion based on the facts and circumstances of each 15
case, and there cannot be any fixed formula that the prosecution has to prove, or need not prove, that the blood groups match. 14. In the instant case, then, we could have placed some reliance on the recovery, had the prosecution at least proved that the blood was of human origin. As observed supra, while discussing the evidence of PWs 9 and 16, the prosecution has tried to concoct the case from stage to stage. Hence, in the absence of positive material indicating that the stained blood was of human origin and of the same blood group as that of the accused, it would be difficult for the Court to rely upon the aspect of recovery of the weapons and tabbal, and such recovery does not help the case of the prosecution. 15. What remains is the evidence of PW11 and PW12, who have deposed about the preparation of conspiracy of the accused to commit the murder of the deceased. As mentioned earlier, all the accused were acquitted for the offence of conspiracy, which means that there are concurrent findings of both the courts below that the prosecution has failed to prove the aspect of conspiracy of the accused to commit the murder of the deceased. 16
Once the conspiracy to commit the murder of the deceased is absent, there is no material on record to show as to why the accused had gathered in the house of Balwan Singh. 16. In view of the above material which is shaky, suspicion arises in the mind of the Court about the genesis of the case of the prosecution. In our considered opinion, the Trial Court and the High Court were not justified in relying upon the evidence of the eye witnesses as well as of PW11 and PW12. Similarly, their reliance on the aspect of recovery was also not justified, for the reasons mentioned earlier. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court are set aside. The appellants are directed to be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. We find that the appellants in these appeals are Accused 1, Accused 2 and Accused 7. Other accused in S.T. No. 57 of 2010 have not preferred an appeal. Since in respect of the appellants herein we find that the prosecution has not proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt, the benefit of this judgment should also enure to the other accused who were convicted in S.T. No. 17
57 of 2010. Accordingly, the other accused in S.T. No. 57 of 2010, who have not preferred appeals before this Court, shall also be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. ……………..…………………………..J. (N.V. RAMANA) …………………………………………..J. (MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR) …….………..…………………………J. (AJAY RASTOGI) NEW DELHI AUGUST 06, 2019 18
ITEM NO.1501 COURT NO.3 SECTION IIC (For Judgment) S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No.727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) WITH Crl.A. No. 1197/2016 Date : 06082019 These matters were called on for pronouncement of judgment today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Akshay K. Ghai, Adv. Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Pranav Sachdeva, AOR Mr. Jatin Bhardwaj, Adv. Ms. Neha R. Adv. Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Rupesh Kumar, AOR Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar pronounced the Reportable Judgment of the Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana, His Lordship and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi. The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed Reportable Judgment. The impugned judgments of the Trial Court and the High Court are set aside. The appellants are directed to be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. We find that the appellants in these appeals are Accused 1, Accused 2 and Accused 7. Other accused in S.T. No. 57 of 2010 have not preferred an appeal. Since in respect of the appellants herein we find that the prosecution has not proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt, the benefit of this judgment should also enure to the other accused who were convicted in S.T. No. 57 of 2010.
2 Accordingly, the other accused in S.T. No. 57 of 2010, who have not preferred appeals before this Court, shall also be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. (VISHAL ANAND) (RAJ RANI NEGI) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Signed Reportable Judgment is placed on the file)
ITEM NO.107 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s).727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) IA No.114101/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No.34799/2018 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No.34797/2018 - I A FOR BAIL IA No.114100/2018 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES WITH Crl.A. No.1197/2016 (II-C) Date : 30-07-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI For Appellant(s) Mr.Sanjay Hegde, Sr.Adv. (In Crl.A.No. Mr.Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR 727/2015) Ms.Shweta Chaurasia, Adv. Mr.Pranjal Kishore, Adv. Mr.Rahul Tomar, Adv. (In Crl.A.1197/16) Mr.Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR Mr.M.P.Singh, Adv. Mr.Akshay K.Ghai, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.Pranav Sachdeva, AOR For State of Ms.Neha Rathi, Adv. Chhattisgarh Mr.Jatin Bhardwaj, Adv. For R.No.2 Mr.Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr.Rupesh Kumar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Arguments heard. Judgment reserved. Written submissions, if any, be filed by 05.08.2019. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (RAJ RANI NEGI) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.107 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s).727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) (With applications for exemption from filing O.T., for bail and permission to file additional documents/facts/annexures) WITH Crl.A. No. 1197/2016 (II-C) Date : 11-04-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER For Appellant(s) Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Pranav Sachdeva, AOR Ms. Neha Rathi, Adv. Mr. Jatin Bhardwaj, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed for, list these matters after two weeks. (SUKHBIR PAUL KAUR) (RAJ RANI NEGI) AR CUM PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.4 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s).727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) (I.A.23066/19 is to be listed) IA No.23066/2019 – Grant of bail Date : 01-03-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR For Appellant(s) Mr.R.Basant, Sr.Adv. Mr.Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Ms.Urvi Kuthiala, Adv. Ms.Meena Sehrawat, Adv. Mr.Vishnu Pazhanganat, Adv. Ms.Shweta Chaurasia, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.Pranav Sachdeva, AOR For R.No.1 Ms.Neha Rathi, Adv. Mr.Jatin Bhardwaj, Adv. For R.No.2 Mr.Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr.Rupesh Kumar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R IA No.23066/2019 in Crl.A.No.727/2015 Heard learned senior counsel for the applicant/appellant. We find no ground to grant bail to the applicant/appellant. The application for bail is accordingly dismissed. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (RAJ RANI NEGI) AR-CUM-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.801 COURT NO.4 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Crl.M.P. No. 23066 of 2019 in Criminal Appeal No(s).727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) (Application for bail) Date : 14-02-2019 This application was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE For Appellant(s) Ms. Shweta Chaurasia, Adv. (Mentioned by) For Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Heard learned counsel for the appellant/applicant. List the application for bail after two weeks. (SUKHBIR PAUL KAUR) (RAJ RANI NEGI) AR CUM PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No.727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) CRL.MP NO.-34797/2018 & 34799/2018-Application for bail and Application for exemption from filing OT) Date : 10-08-2018 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.M. JOSEPH For Appellant(s) Mr. Vivek K. Tankha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Mr. Varun Tankha, Adv. Ms. Shweta Chaurasia, Adv. Mr. Prashant Shivarajan, Adv. Mr. Rahul Tomar, Adv. Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Atul Jha, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Jha, Adv. Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the appeal for hearing next week. (POOJA ARORA) (ASHA SONI) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER
REVISED ITEM NO.809 COURT NO.1 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Crl.MP No.34797/2018 In Criminal Appeal No(s).727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 31-07-2018 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Appellant(s) Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, Adv.(Mentioned by) For Respondent(s) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R List in the next week before an appropriate Bench, as per roster. ( Ch etan Kumar) (H.S.Parasher) AR-cum-PS Assistant Registrar
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.5 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) IA No.81701/2018 – EXTENSION OF BAIL Date : 15-06-2018 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA (VACATION BENCH) For Appellant(s) Mr. Vivek K.Tankha,Sr.Adv. Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Ms. Ashima Mandla,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Atul Jha,Adv. Mr. Sandeep Jha,Adv. Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava,Adv. For Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have perused the application seeking extension of interim bail. By order dated 20 th April, 2018 interim bail was granted for two months which is to expire on 20 th June, 2018. The bail was granted on the ground of marriage of the second daughter of the Applicant. 1
In the present application, Applicant now submits that the engagement of his third daughter named Mamta Singh and the wedding of his son named Martand Singh are to be performed on 24 th June and 11 th July, 2018 respectively. Considering the assertions in the application, we extend the period of interim bail upto 15 th July, 2018 on same terms and conditions. The Appellant/Applicant shall surrender on or before 15 th July, 2018. We also deem it appropriate that Criminal Appeal No.727 of 2015 be taken up for hearing as the applicant is said to have completed eight years of actual imprisonment. Let the matter be listed in the third week of July, 2018 for hearing. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (JAGDISH CHANDER) COURT MASTER BRANCH OFFICER 2
ITEM NO.804 COURT NO.4 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Crl.M.P. No.81710 of 2018 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) (Application for extension of interim bail) Date : 08-06-2018 This matter was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN (VACATION BENCH) For Appellant(s) Ms. Shweta Chaurasia,Adv. (mentioned by) Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post the application for extension of interim bail on 15.06.2018. (MAHABIR SINGH) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER
1 ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRL.M.P. NO.51949/2018 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 20-04-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Appellant(s) Mr. N.K. Mody, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ankur Mody, Adv. Ms. Siddhi Padia, Adv. Mr. Santosh Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sarvam Ritam Khare, AOR Ms. Shweta Chaurasia, Adv. Ms. Meena Sehrawat, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Atul Jha, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Jha, Adv. Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. The applicant-appellant is seeking temporary bail, so as to participate in his daughter’s marriage (second daughter), which according to the Marriage Card placed on record of this case is scheduled for 28.04.2018.
2 By order dated 26.02.2016, this Court had granted temporary bail to the applicant-appellant to enable him to arrange and take part in the marriage ceremony of his first daughter. Keeping in mind the above facts and also that the applicant-appellant has already suffered incarceration for a period of almost eight years, we are of the view that the concession of temporary bail should be extended to the applicant-appellant. We accordingly direct, that the applicant- appellant shall be released on temporary bail on 21.04.2018, and he shall surrender on 20.06.2018, subject to the following conditions :- (i) the applicant-appellant shall furnish two securities in the sum of rupees one lakh each to the satisfaction of the trial Court; (ii) the applicant-appellant shall report to the nearest police station twice a week during the period of bail granted to him. Consequent upon the surrender of the applicant- appellant on 20.06.2018, the jail authorities shall intimate this Court about the factum of his surrender. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 51949 of 2018 is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. (NEETU KHAJURIA) COURT MASTER (ASHA SONI) BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.808 COURT NO.1 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Cr.MP.No.51949/2018 In Criminal Appeal No(s).727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) Date : 13-04-2018 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD For Appellant(s) Dr.Sarvam Ritam Khare, Adv.(Mentioned by) For Respondent(s) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R List in the next week before an appropriate Bench, as per roster. ( Ch etan Kumar ) (H.S.Parasher) Court Master Assistant Registrar
1 ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.2 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) WITH Crl.A. No. 1197/2016 (II-C) (IA 72381/2017 FOR BAIL] Date : 09-10-2017 This appln was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh, AOR Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR Mr. Atul Jha, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Jha, Adv. Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, AOR Mr. C. D. Singh, AOR (NP) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Necessary information and documents in support of the medical condition of the appellant No.1 (Latel Ram) in Criminal Appeal No.1197 of 2016 has been brought on record. We have perused the same. On due consideration, we are satisfied that the present is not a fit case for grant of bail to the appellant(s). Application for bail is
2 accordingly dismissed. Hearing of the appeal is expedited. Registry is directed to list both the appeals for hearing in the month of March, 2018. (NEETU KHAJURIA) COURT MASTER (ASHA SONI) BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA 72381/2017 FOR GRANT OF BAIL IN CRL.A. NO. 001197/2016) WITH Crl.A. No. 1197/2016 (II-C) (IA 72381/2017 FOR BAIL) Date : 03-10-2017 These applns. were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh, AOR Mr. Shiv Sagar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Atul Jha, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Jha, Adv. Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR Mr. C. D. Singh, AOR (NP) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for the accused-appellant in Criminal Appeal No.1197 of 2016 prays for a week's time to bring on record the requisite materials in terms of the order dated 28.08.2017. Time prayed for is granted. List the application on 9 th October, 2017. (NEETU KHAJURIA) COURT MASTER (S.S.R. KRISHNA) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
1 ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA 1813/2017 FOR BAIL) WITH Crl.A. No. 1197/2016 (II-C) (IA NO 72381/2017 FOR BAIL) Date : 28-08-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Appellant(s) Mr. Vivek Tankha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sachin Pujari, Adv. Ms. Arti Singh, AOR Mr. Shiv Sagar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma, AOR Mr. Dinesh Minocha, Adv. Mr. C. D. Singh, AOR Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R I.A. 1813/2017 IN CRL.A. No.727 of 2015 The prayer for bail is not entertained for the present. I.A. No.1813 of 2017 is rejected. Hearing of the appeal is expedited.
2 We make it clear that if the aforesaid appeal is not heard within a period of six months, the appellant is at liberty to move an application for bail afresh. I.A. 72381/2017 IN CRL.A. No.1197 of 2016 List the application for bail after two weeks to enable the learned counsel for the applicant-appellant to lay requisite material(s) before the Court to show that the treatment the appellant is receiving for his aliments in the jail is not adequate and that he needs further or specialized treatment which he cannot receive while remaining in jail. (NEETU KHAJURIA) COURT MASTER (ASHA SONI) BRANCH OFFICER
ITEM NO.102 COURT NO.4 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No.727 of 2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR (CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (For on I.A.7080/2015 for grant of bail on I.A.1813/2017 for exemption from filing O.T. on IA 1814/2017) With Crl.A.No.1197/2016 (For exemption from filing O.T. on IA 20246/2016 for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment on IA 20247/2016) Date : 02/06/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAN M.SHANTANAGOUDAR HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA (Vacation Bench) For Appellant(s) Ms.Arti Singh, Adv. Mr.Shiv Sagar Tiwari, Adv. Mr.M.P.Singh, Adv. Mr.Rajeev Kumar Bansal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr.Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr.Ajay Sharma, Adv. Mr.Rupesh Kumar, Adv. Mr.C.D.Singh, Adv. Upon hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List after summer vacation. (SATISH KUMAR YADAV) (TAPAN KR. CHAKRABORTY) AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.105 COURT NO.5 SECTION II-C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.727/2015 BALWAN SINGH APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) AND ANR. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1197/2016 Date : 19/05/2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NAGESWARA RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA (VACATION BENCH) For Appellant(s) Mr. Nagendra Rai,Sr. Adv. Ms. Arti Singh, AOR Mr. Mahabir Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shiv Sagar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, AOR For Respondent(s) Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh, AOR. Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava,Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,AOR Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R List the matters on 25 th May, 2017. (Neetu Khajuria) Court Master (Asha Soni) Court Master
ITEM NO.109 COURT NO.05 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No. 727 of 2015 Balwan Singh Petitioner(s) VERSUS State of Chhatisgarh through P.S. Lormi, Bilaspur (Chattisgarh) & Anr. Respondent(s) With Crl. A. 1197 of 2016 Date : 11/05/2017 These Appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA (VACATION BENCH) For Petitioner(s) Ms. Arti Singh, Adv. Mr. Shiv Sagar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Bansuri Swarj, Adv. Ms. Urvashi Bandhu, Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R As prayed, list on 16.05.2017. (NEELAM GULATI) COURT MASTER (TAPAN KR. CHAKRABORTY) COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.35 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Criminal Appeal No(s). 1197/2016 LATEL RAM AND ANR Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 01/05/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Sole respondent is duly represented. Original record has been received from the High Court as well as Trial Court. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to file additional documents. Registry to process the matter for being listed before the Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (RAJESH KUMAR GOEL) Registrar
èITEM NO.35 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. RAJESH KUMAR GOELCriminal Appeal No(s). 1197/2016LATEL RAM AND ANR Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)Date : 01/05/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RSole respondent is duly represented.Original record has been received from the High Court aswell as Trial Court.The Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that he doesnot want to file additional documents.Registry to process the matter for being listed beforethe Hon'ble Court, as per rules. (RAJESH KUMAR GOEL) Registrar
ITEM NO.16 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR.Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for bail and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) WITH Crl.A. No. 1197/2016 Date : 02/03/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr. M.P. Singh,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Sandeepan Pathak,Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. Mr. C. D. Singh,Adv. Null,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl.Appeal No. 727 of 2015 Appellant has filed additional documents. Crl. Appeal No. 1197 of 2016 Service is complete on the sole respondent. Await Original Record from the High Court. Reminder be issued. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
ÞITEM NO.16 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWALCriminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR.Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for bail and exemption from filing O.T. and officereport)WITHCrl.A. No. 1197/2016Date : 02/03/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr. M.P. Singh,Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Sandeepan Pathak,Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. Mr. C. D. Singh,Adv. Null,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RCrl.Appeal No. 727 of 2015Appellant has filed additional documents.Crl. Appeal No. 1197 of 2016Service is complete on the sole respondent.Await Original Record from the High Court. Reminder beissued. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 1813 & 1814/2017 In Criminal Appeal No. 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (For bail and exemption from filing O.T. and office report) Date : 20/02/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO For Appellant(s) Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr. Sachin, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Vinay Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh,Adv. Mr. Sandeepan Pathak, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Learned counsel for both the parties agree that the matter may be heard in the ensuing summer vacation. List the matter in the ensuing summer vacation. [ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Indu Pokhriyal ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master
°ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCRLMP. 1813 & 1814/2017 In Criminal Appeal No. 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s)(For bail and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)Date : 20/02/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAOFor Appellant(s) Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr. Sachin, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv.Mr. Vinay Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh,Adv. Mr. Sandeepan Pathak, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLearned counsel for both the parties agree thatthe matter may be heard in the ensuing summervacation. List the matter in the ensuing summer vacation.[ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Indu Pokhriyal ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master
°ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCRLMP. 1813 & 1814/2017 In Criminal Appeal No. 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s)(For bail and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)Date : 20/02/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAOFor Appellant(s) Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr. Sachin, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv.Mr. Vinay Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh,Adv. Mr. Sandeepan Pathak, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLearned counsel for both the parties agree thatthe matter may be heard in the ensuing summervacation. List the matter in the ensuing summer vacation.[ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Indu Pokhriyal ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master
°ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCRLMP. 1813 & 1814/2017 In Criminal Appeal No. 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s)(For bail and exemption from filing O.T. and office report)Date : 20/02/2017 These applications were called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAOFor Appellant(s) Mr. Amarendra Sharan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr. Sachin, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv.Mr. Vinay Dubey, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. Mr. C.D. Singh,Adv. Mr. Sandeepan Pathak, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RLearned counsel for both the parties agree thatthe matter may be heard in the ensuing summervacation. List the matter in the ensuing summer vacation.[ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Indu Pokhriyal ] A.R.-cum-P.S. Court Master
ITEM NO.14 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH Crl.A. No. 1197/2016 (With (With appln.(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and Office Report) Date : 01/02/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr M.P.Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl.A. No.727/2015 Parties have not filed additional documents despite availing opportunity. Crl.A. No.1197/2016 Await service report from the High Court in respect of the sole respondent. Reminder be issued. List again on 2.3.2017. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
ZITEM NO.14 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s)(with office report)WITHCrl.A. No. 1197/2016(With (With appln.(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugnedjudgment and appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and Office Report)Date : 01/02/2017 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr M.P.Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RCrl.A. No.727/2015Parties have not filed additional documents despiteavailing opportunity.Crl.A. No.1197/2016Await service report from the High Court in respect ofthe sole respondent. Reminder be issued.List again on 2.3.2017. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
ITEM NO.29 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) WITH Crl.A. No. 1197/2016 (With (With appln.(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and Office Report) Date : 16/12/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr M.P.Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Notice of Lodgement of Petition of Appeal be issued in Crl.A. No.1197/2016. Parties may file additional documents in Crl.A. No.727/2015 within four weeks time as last opportunity. List again on 1.2.2017. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
(ITEM NO.29 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s)(with office report)WITHCrl.A. No. 1197/2016(With (With appln.(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugnedjudgment and appln.(s) for exemption from filing O.T. and Office Report) Date : 16/12/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. Mr M.P.Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RNotice of Lodgement of Petition of Appeal be issued inCrl.A. No.1197/2016. Parties may file additional documents in Crl.A.No.727/2015 within four weeks time as last opportunity.List again on 1.2.2017. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
ITEM NO.21 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)...... CRLMP No(s). 19346/2016 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 10/02/2015 in CRLA No. 179/2011 passed by the High Court Of Chhatisgarh At Bilaspur) LATEL RAM AND ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report) Date : 02/12/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE For Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv. Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. To be heard along with Criminal Appeal No. 727 of 2015. (Ashwani Thakur) (Mala Kumari Sharma ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
SEC. II – C IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 19346 OF 2016 (APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING OF THE SLP) IN PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO. OF 2016 LATEL RAM & ANR. ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH ...RESPONDENT OFFICE REPO RT The matter abovementioned has been filed by Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, Advocate on behalf of the Petitioner above named against the Judgment and Order dated 10 th February, 2015 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No. 179 of 2011. It is submitted that there is a delay of 526 days in filing of the Special Leave Petition and counsel for the petitioner has filed an application in this regard. It is further submitted that SLP(Crl.) No. 3137 of 2015 (now converted in to Criminal Appeal No.727 of 2015) arising out of common order of the High Court was listed before the Hon'ble Court on 24.04.2015, when the Court was pleased to grant leave.(copy of record of proceeding dated 24.04.2015 is enclosed herewith) The application abovementioned is listed before the Hon'ble Court with this office report. DATED this the 30 th Day of November, 2016. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Copy to: Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, Advocate ASSISTANT REGISTRAR rahul
rITEM NO.21 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIC S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPetition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)...... CRLMP No(s). 19346/2016(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 10/02/2015in CRLA No. 179/2011 passed by the High Court Of Chhatisgarh AtBilaspur)LATEL RAM AND ANR Petitioner(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing SLP and office report)Date : 02/12/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPREFor Petitioner(s) Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal,Adv. Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RDelay condoned. Leave granted. To be heard along with Criminal Appeal No. 727 of 2015. (Ashwani Thakur) (Mala Kumari Sharma ) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
ITEM NO.10 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 26/10/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms Vidya V Pawar, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R None appears for respondent no.1 despite due service. Respondent no.2 is duly represented. Original records have been received. Parties to file additional documents within four weeks time. List again on 16.12.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
nITEM NO.10 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION II C S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 26/10/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms Vidya V Pawar, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RNone appears for respondent no.1 despite due service.Respondent no.2 is duly represented.Original records have been received.Parties to file additional documents within four weekstime.List again on 16.12.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
ITEM NO.53 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 29/08/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await certificate of service from the High Court in respect of respondent No.1. Reminder be issued to this effect. Respondent No.2 is duly represented. List again on 26.10.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
<ITEM NO.53 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWALCriminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s)(with office report)Date : 29/08/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RAwait certificate of service from the High Court inrespect of respondent No.1. Reminder be issued to thiseffect.Respondent No.2 is duly represented.List again on 26.10.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
ITEM NO.29 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 20/07/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await certificate of service of respondent No.1 from the High Court. Reminder be issued. Respondent No.2 is duly represented. List again on 29.8.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
F ITEM NO.29 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 20/07/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await certificate of service of respondent No.1 from the High Court. Reminder be issued. Respondent No.2 is duly represented. List again on 29.8.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRASHI GUPTADate: 2016.07.2117:11:37 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.54 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 19/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Reminder be issued to the concerned High Court for original record. Await certificate of service from the concerned High Court. Reminder be issued. List again on 20.7.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
X ITEM NO.54 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) AND ANR. Respondent(s) (with office report) Date : 19/04/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Reminder be issued to the concerned High Court for original record. Await certificate of service from the concerned High Court. Reminder be issued. List again on 20.7.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byHema JoshiDate: 2016.04.1917:02:20 ISTReason:
1 ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.3 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 2414/2016 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) and ANR. Respondent(s) (for bail and office report) Date : 26/02/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Vivek Tankha, Sr. Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. No.2 for Mr. Ajay Sharma,AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties. The applicant-appellant is seeking temporary bail, so as to participate in his daughter's wedding, which according to the Marriage Card placed on the record of this case is scheduled for 18/19.04.2016. Keeping in mind the fact, that the applicant-appellant has already suffered incarceration for a period of five years, we are of the view, that the concession of temporary bail should be extended to the applicant-appellant. We accordingly direct, that the applicant-appellant shall be released on temporary bail on 10.04.2016, and he shall surrender
2 on 24.04.2016, subject to the following conditions: i) the applicant-appellant shall furnish two securities in the sum of rupees one lakh each to the satisfaction of the trial Court; ii) the applicant-appellant shall be accompanied by two armed police personnel round the clock for which the applicant-appellant shall reimburse charges to the concerned police station. Consequent upon the surrender of the applicant-appellant on 24.04.2016, the jail authorities shall intimate this Court about the factum of his surrender. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2414 of 2016 is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. (Chander Bala) (Parveen Kr. Chawla) Court Master AR-cum-PS
¬ 1 ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.3 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 2414/2016 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) and ANR. Respondent(s) (for bail and office report) Date : 26/02/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. NAGAPPAN For Appellant(s) Mr. Vivek Tankha, Sr. Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava, Adv. No.2 for Mr. Ajay Sharma,AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R We have heard learned counsel for the rival parties. The applicant-appellant is seeking temporary bail, so as to participate in his daughter's wedding, which according to the Marriage Card placed on the record of this case is scheduled for 18/19.04.2016. Keeping in mind the fact, that the applicant-appellant has already suffered incarceration for a period of five years, we are of the view, that the concession of temporary bail should beSignature Not Verified extended to the applicant-appellant.Digitally signed byPARVEEN KUMARDate: 2016.02.2617:17:23 ISTReason: We accordingly direct, that the applicant-appellant shall be released on temporary bail on 10.04.2016, and he shall surrender 2on 24.04.2016, subject to the following conditions:i) the applicant-appellant shall furnish two securities in thesum of rupees one lakh each to the satisfaction of the trial Court;
ii) the applicant-appellant shall be accompanied by two armedpolice personnel round the clock for which the applicant-appellantshall reimburse charges to the concerned police station. Consequent upon the surrender of the applicant-appellanton 24.04.2016, the jail authorities shall intimate this Court aboutthe factum of his surrender. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 2414 of 2016 isaccordingly disposed of in the above terms.(Chander Bala) (Parveen Kr. Chawla) Court Master AR-cum-PS
ITEM NO.30 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 259/2016 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (For impleadment as party respondent and office report) Date : 15/02/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava,Adv. Ms. Himadri M. Mukherjee,Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl.MP.No.259 of 2016 for application for impleadment as party respondent is allowed. Cause title be amended accordingly. (SAPNA BISHT) SR. P.A. (CHANDER BALA) COURT MASTER
\210 ITEM NO.30 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 259/2016 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (For impleadment as party respondent and office report) Date : 15/02/2016 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. Abhinav Shrivastava,Adv. Ms. Himadri M. Mukherjee,Adv. Mr. Ajay Sharma,Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl.MP.No.259 of 2016 for application for impleadment as party respondent is allowed. Cause title be amended accordingly. (SAPNA BISHT) (CHANDER BALA) SR. P.A. COURT MASTERSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed bySAPNA BISHTDate: 2016.02.1616:55:51 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.811 COURT NO.1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP No..... of 2016 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) Date : 05/02/2016 This petition was mentioned today. CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post CRLMP No...... (Appln. For bail) within four weeks. (Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
`ITEM NO.811 COURT NO.1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSCRLMP No..... of 2016 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH)Respondent(s)Date : 05/02/2016 This petition was mentioned today.CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHIFor Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON being mentioned the Court made the following O R D E R Post CRLMP No...... (Appln. For bail) within four weeks.(Shashi Sareen) (Veena Khera) AR-cum-PS Court Master
ITEM NO.57 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for bail/suspension of sentence and impleadment as party respondent and office report) Date : 03/02/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Await certificate of service as well as original record from the High Court. Reminder be issued. List again on 19.4.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
¦ITEM NO.57 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. PAWAN DEV KOTWAL Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUSSTATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s)(with appln. (s) for bail/suspension of sentence and impleadment asparty respondent and office report)Date : 03/02/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E RAwait certificate of service as well as original recordfrom the High Court. Reminder be issued.List again on 19.4.2016. (PAWAN DEV KOTWAL) Registrar
ITEM NO.47 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for bail/suspension of sentence and office report) Date : 24/11/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Ashfaq Khan, Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service report from the High Court concerned qua the sole respondent is still awaited. Reminder be issued. List again on 3.2.2016. (RACHNA GUPTA) Registrar
v ITEM NO.47 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MRS. RACHNA GUPTA Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for bail/suspension of sentence and office report) Date : 24/11/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Ashfaq Khan, Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service report from the High Court concerned qua the sole respondent is still awaited. Reminder be issued. List again on 3.2.2016. (RACHNA GUPTA) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2015.11.2416:29:55 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.8 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 17641/2015 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (For bail and office report) Date : 02/11/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl.Misc. Petition for bail is rejected for the present. (MADHU BALA) (ASHA SONI) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
Ö ITEM NO.5 COURT NO.8 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CRLMP. 17641/2015 in Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (For bail and office report) Date : 02/11/2015 This application was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Crl.Misc. Petition for bail is rejected for the present. (MADHU BALA) (ASHA SONI) COURT MASTER COURT MASTERSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byMadhu BalaDate: 2015.11.0217:12:36 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.22 COURT NO.11 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (Office report for directions) Date : 17/09/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA [IN CHAMBERS] For Appellant(s) Mr. D. Kumanan, Adv. Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R One week time is granted to the learned counsel for the appellant to file spare copies for effecting service as pointed by the Registry. (Ashima Chhabra) (Mala Kumari Sharma ) Sr. P.A. Court Master
ITEM NO.82 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. SURAJIT DEY Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for bail/suspension of sentence) Date : 13/08/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Since 24.4.2015, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner failed to provide the spare copies. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further directions. Await orders. List thereafter. (SURAJIT DEY) Registrar
¾ ITEM NO.82 REGISTRAR COURT. 1 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. SURAJIT DEY Criminal Appeal No(s). 727/2015 BALWAN SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF CHATTISGARH THROUGH, P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHATTISGARH) Respondent(s) (with appln. (s) for bail/suspension of sentence) Date : 13/08/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Ms. Arti Singh,Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Since 24.4.2015, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner failed to provide the spare copies. Registry to process the matter for listing before the Hon'ble Judge in Chambers for further directions. Await orders. List thereafter. (SURAJIT DEY) RegistrarSignature Not VerifiedDigitally signed byRupam DhamijaDate: 2015.08.2010:20:17 ISTReason:
ITEM NO.12 COURT NO.8 SECTION IIA S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO(S). 3137/2015 (ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 10/02/2015 IN CRLAP NO. 178/2011 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR) BALWAN SINGH PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH P.S. LORMI, BILASPUR(CHHATTISGARH) RESPONDENT(S) (WITH INTERIM RELIEF AND OFFICE REPORT) Date : 24/04/2015 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Vivek Tankha, Sr. Adv. Ms. Arti Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted. [VINOD LAKHINA] COURT MASTER [ASHA SONI] COURT MASTER