1 2025:CGHC:11987 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 1927 of 2025 Satrupa Pal W/o. Sitaram Pal Aged About 55 Years R/o. Village Doma, Near Imli Jhaad, Durga Chowk, P.S. Mujgahan, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Mujgahan, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vivek Mishra , Advocate For Respondent/State :Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, Panel lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 11.03.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this Third bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 94/2023, registered at Police Station- Mujgahan district Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 302 and 307 of Indian Penal Code. 2. Brief facts of this case is that on 05.04.2023 at about 4:30 PM both the applicant set the deceased on fire with matchstick due to which the deceased escaped the house and has suffered 2 massive burn injury and she was taken to hospital where she died subsequently due to the burn injury. That the deceased was a newly wedded daughter in law of the applicant. 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 applicant is in jail since 16.04.2023 and the trial court has framed charges against the applicant and there are about 30 prosecution witnesses in which it will definitely take time to conclude trial, therefore, during the pendency of the trial the applicant must be given bail. 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 no substantial ground of circumstantial changes . Therefore, this 3 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. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial as soon as possible, if no legal impediment. 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