1 2025:CGHC:21501 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 736 of 2025 1 - Chandrika Rajwade S/o Mansai Rajwade Aged About 48 Years Caste- Rajwar, R/o - Village Sarastal, P.S. Bhatgaon, District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station Police Station Pratappur, District- Surajpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate. For State : Shri Neeraj Sharma, Dy. Advocate General. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Judgment on Board 08.05.2025 1. Pursuant to the order dated 09.04.2025 the complainant appeared before the court through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA and raised objection in granting bail to the appellant. Her submission is taken on record. 2. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred under Section 14(A)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, 'the Act, 1989') against order dated 24.03.2025 passed in bail application No.193/2025 by the Sessions Judge, Surajpur, whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2025.05.16 12:05:31 +0530 2 No.292/2024 registered at Police Station, Pratappur, District Surajpur, for the offence under Sections 302, 201 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, 1989, has been rejected. 3. Case of prosecution, in brief is that, on 28.01.2024 the complainant Smt. Indermania Pando lodged a missing report that her daughter was missing since 21.01.2024 and her whereabouts could not be traced out. During enquiry of missing person, the witnesses raised suspicion over the appellant and upon his interrogation he disclosed that he was residing with the deceased since 2017 and on 21.01.2024 he committed her murder and in order to conceal the crime he thrown her dead body in Jhapi Nala Jungle, her clothes were burnt in the Jungle and buried the dead body in a pit. The dead body of deceased was exhumed after permission of Sub Divisional Magistrate Pratappur and a decomposed dead body almost in the form of skeleton were recovered. Panchnama was prepared and from the artificial Necklace and hair of the dead body it was identified as dead body of deceased Seema Pando. In the postmortem, the Doctor has opined that nature of death is likely to homicidal type and the cause of death is undetermined due to advanced decomposition. Mild redness over temporal bone suggests possible trauma. The memorandum statement of the appellant was recorded and he was arrested on 25.11.2024 and charge sheet has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there is no clinching evidence against the appellant to connect him in crime in question. There is no evidence with respect to any last seen together or any recovery of weapons. Except his memorandum statement recorded 3 on 25.11.2024, nothing is there is the charge sheet against him. He would also submit that dead body was already recovered on 24.11.2024 but his memorandum statement was recorded on 25.11.2024, therefore, it cannot be said that dead body was recovered on the instance of appellant and his memorandum statement loses its significance. The dead body was recovered almost about an year after her missing and no allegations were made by the family members of deceased against the appellant in between that period. The appellant is in jail since 25.11.2024. Charge sheet has been filed and final adjudication will take sometime, therefore, the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand the counsel for the State opposes the submissions so made and submits that the witnesses have raised suspicion upon the appellant as deceased was residing with him as his wife. When suspicion have been raised by them, the appellant was being interrogated by the police on 24.11.2024 and in presence of witnesses he disclosed about the incident and location where he buried the dead body. On his instance the police went on the spot, exhumed the dead body and recovered it. Although his memorandum statement have been formally recorded on 25.11.2024, but he was interrogated on 24.11.2024 and on his instance the dead body was recovered. Except the appellant, none else were in knowledge of the location of dead body and it was recovered only on the instance of the appellant. The appellant was residing with deceased but he did not try to search her about her whereabouts in between that period and therefore there are sufficient evidence against the appellant that he committed murder of 4 the deceased and buried the dead body and therefore he is not entitled for bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From perusal of the statement of the witnesses it reflects that the mother of the deceased made a missing report on 21.01.2024 and during enquiry of missing person the witnesses Smt. Indermania, Chhotulal Pando, Anita Pando, Shobhnath Aghariya and Puja Pando have raised suspicion upon the appellant as the deceased was residing with the appellant as his wife. They also disclosed that there were frequent quarrel between the appellant and deceased and on 24.11.2024 when they had gone to police station, the appellant was there in the police station and when the police persons interrogated him, he disclosed about the incident as well as the place where he buried the dead body. Along with them, the appellant took the police persons to the spot where they recovered the dead body and after seeing the artificial Necklace as well as hair, they identified the dead body of deceased Seema Pando. 8. Considering the entire material available in the charge sheet, the nature of allegation and the material collected during investigation, further the statement of aforesaid witnesses and cause of death opined by the Doctor in his postmortem report, I am not inclined to release the appellant on bail. Therefore, his bail application filed in the form of Appeal is rejected. Accordingly, the Appeal also stands dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder