1 2025:CGHC:11992 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 1979 of 2025 Shankar Bhatt S/o Lt. Shri Dhaniram Bhatt Aged About 72 Years R/o Ganganagar, Kawardha, Thana Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Kawardha, District - Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Akhilesh Mishra , Advocate For Respondent/State :Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 11.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this second bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 598/20224, registered at Police Station- Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS. 2. Brief facts of this case is that on the report of the applicant, a memorandum statement was recorded by taking suspect Shankar Bhatt into custody at Kawardha Police Station and on 2 his presentation on the basis of the memorandum statement, the cob and other items used in the murder were recovered and confiscated. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that, the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. He contended that the there were 20 witnesses who have to be examined and till now only 05 witnesses have been examined and despite issuance of summons to the witnesses they could not appear before the trial court and therefore inordinate delay is caused. PW-04 and PW-05 turned hostile and they are not supporting the case of the prosecution. Hence he pleads to grant bail to the applicant in the interest of justice. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application submitted by the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case and other materials available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the nature of offence, and the evidence available on record it is crystal clear that the applicant is involved in the crime and there are clinching chain of evidences which proves the same. This court finds that there are 3 no substantial ground of circumstantial changes . Therefore, this court is of the considered opinion that this case is not a fit case to allow the bail application of the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the instant miscellaneous criminal appeal stands dismissed. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge alfiza