1 2025:CGHC:21989 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3314 of 2025 1. Deepak Kumar Shiv S/o Shri Sevak Ram Shiv Aged About 27 Years R/o Village - Baroda, Police Thana - Vidhansabha, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant (In jail) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Vidhansabha, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr.Galib Dwivedi, Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Pragya Pandey, Govt. Advocate SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 13.05.2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (henceforth ‘the BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who is in custody in connection with Crime No.149/2022 registered at Police Station Vidhansabha, District Raipur (CG) for the 2 offence punishable under Sections 307, 304(B), 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, father of deceased, lodged report in concerned police station stating that on 31.3.2022 at about 8:00 a.m. the applicant, son-in-law of complainant, with intention to commit murder of his wife, has poured kerosene on her and set her on fire as a result she sustained grievous burn injuries. She was taken to the hospital for treatment. Her dying declaration was recorded and thereafter, during course of treatment she died. Based on said complaint, instant crime is registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 3.4.2022. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated. Allegations levelled against applicant are absolutely false and baseless. He submits that the deceased died due to an accident when she was doing work. There was no mental or physical torture of the deceased by applicant for the demand of dowry prior to her death. Charge sheet has been filed, out of total 27 enlisted prosecution witness only 17 witnesses have been examined till date, hence, conclusion of trial is likely to take time. Applicant is in jail since 3.4.2022, hence he be enlarged on regular bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes bail application by submitting that deceased died unnatural death due to burning. In the dying declaration, she made specific allegation against the applicant, which cannot be ignored and disbelieved at this stage. Hence, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations against applicant; submissions of learned counsel for both the sides and further considering the dying declaration of deceased, which is against present applicant, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant at this stage. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. 7. At this stage, learned counsel for applicant pray for a direction to expedite the trial. 8. Considering the period of pre-trial detention of the applicant, the trial Court concerned is directed to expedite the trial. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge roshan/- SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI