1 2025:CGHC:13966 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1043 of 2025 Suraj Nishad @ Sooraj Kenwat S/o Ramphal Kenwat Aged About 24 Years, R/o Takhatapur, Belsari, Ward No.14, Thana Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station Sakri, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. P. Sahu, Advocate. For Res/State : Mr. Dilman Rati Minj, Govt. Advocate. SB : Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board 24.03.2025 1. This second application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the accused/applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.385/2022 registered at Police Station Sakri, Bilaspur for the offence under Sections 294, 506, 307 & 302 of the IPC. 2. Prosecution case, in brief, is that on the date of incident i.e. 26.07.2022, when the present Applicant, Vivek Sharma, Sonu Kewant along with deceased Lakhan were returning on their motor cycle from Village Lokhandi, at 5.00 pm their motorcycle ran out of petrol. Thereafter, Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI Date: 2025.03.25 11:05:57 +0530 2 deceased Lakhan asked the present applicant to arrange petrol and when he failed to do so, the dispute arose between them and when Vivek Sharma (PW-1) came to rescue the deceased, the present applicant assaulted him by using knife on the left side of the neck, right side of stomach and also assaulted the deceased on the left side of his chest and stomach, as a result of which, the deceased succumbed to death, therefore, the offence as aforesaid has been registered against the present Applicant. 3. It is pertinent to mention here that earlier bail application filed by the accused/applicant was rejected by this Court in MCRC No.2286/2023 on 06.05.2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the accused/applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that only on the basis of suspicion the accused/applicant has been arrested and there is no material evidence against the applicant. He also submits that the accused/applicant is languishing in jail since 30.07.2022 and conclusion of trial is likely to considerable time. Therefore, the accused/applicant may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and would submit that the earlier bail application was considered and rejected on merits. He also submits that looking to the statement of PW-1 and other evidence available and looking to the nature of offence present is not fit case for grant of bail. He also submits that the trial is already on 3 progress and appreciation of evidence is not required at this stage. Therefore, the bail application is liable to be rejected. 6. Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, further considering the fact that earlier bail application has been rejected on merits and there is no material change after rejection of the said bail application, I am not inclined to the release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Ajay