1 2025:CGHC:19359 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2934 of 2025 1 - Manav Kanhaiya S/o Late Kamlesh Kumar Kanhaiya Aged About 25 Years R/o Ward No. 24 House No. 134 Jamaatpara, Police Station- Kotwali, Distt.- Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Kotwali, Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Shri Sabyasachi Bhaduri, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Neeraj Sharma, Dy. Advocate General. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 29.04.2025 1. This is first bail application seeking grant of bail to the Applicant who is in jail since 23.05.2024 in connection with Crime No.174/2024 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 34, 323, 506, 147,148,149 and 307 IPC. 2. The case of prosecution in brief is that, on 11.03.2024, at about 3:00 PM, the accused persons have assaulted the deceased- Kishan @ Jhilli by knife and hockey stick, by which he received multiple injuries on his body. He was immediately taken to hospital, where he was Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2025.04.29 18:20:55 +0530 2 declared brought dead. On the merg intimation sent by the doctor, the police has registered the offence and started investigation. During the investigation, the police has also recorded the statement of two injured eyewitnesses-Akshat and Bharat Bansod. The memorandum statement of the present applicants have been recorded and from the applicant- Sanjay, one bamboo club has been seized and other weapon of offence has been seized from other accused persons. The present applicants have been arrested on 12.03.2024 and charge sheet has been filed. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that in the FIR the present applicant has not been named. His name appears in the statement of eyewitness Akshat and Bharat who subsequently examined before the trial court and who have not supported the case of prosecution. Even the memorandum and seizure witnesses have turned hostile. From the present applicant only Danda has been seized whereas no injuries were found received from Danda. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail as final adjudication may take sometime. 4. On the other hand the counsel for the State opposes the bail application and have submitted that all the accused persons have assaulted the deceased which has been witnesses by injured witnesses Akshat and Bharat. The report was lodged by the father of the deceased and therefore the name of applicant might not have come in the FIR, but in the statement of the injured witnesses his name reflects. He would also submit that the bail application of other co- accused namely Sanjay @ Sanju and Imran Hussain Aka Jainul Aka Jaid have been rejected by this court vide order dated 12.12.2024 in 3 MCRC Nos. 7097 of 2024 and 8268 of 2024. The case of present applicant is also similar to that cases and therefore he is also not entitled for bail. 5. Without commenting on merits, considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegations and material collected during investigation and also considering the fact that bail application of other co-accused namely Sanjay @ Sanju and Imran Hussain Aka Jainul Aka Jaid have also been rejected by this court vide order dated 12.12.2024 in MCRC Nos. 7097 of 2024 and 8268 of 2024, this Court is of the opinion that present is not a fit case where the Applicant can be enlarged on bail. 6. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder