1 2025:CGHC:31144 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4575 of 2025 1 - Rajobai Baiga W/o Bhursa Baiga Aged About 50 Years R/o Sakni Nagadbara Mathpur, Police Station Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 03/07/2025 1. This is the first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 filed by the applicant, who is arrested on 22.02.2024, in connection with Crime No. 21 of 2024, registered at Police Station Kukdur, District Kabirdham (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 120-B, 147, 148, 149, 436 of IPC. 2. The case of prosecution is that, on 15.01.2024, the Kotwar of the village namely Akkal Singh informed the police that, at about 7:00 AM, he saw that smoke were coming out from the house of the VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.07.08 18:08:51 +0530 2 deceased Budhram Baiga, and when he went on the spot, he saw that the entire house of the deceased Budhram Baiga was burnt and Budhram Baiga, his wife Hirmani Bai and their son Jolhuram died due to burn injuries. The police recorded merg intimation and started inquiry. During the merg inquiry, the statement of the witnesses Lalsingh, Shantibai and Kamlesh Shriwas were recorded, in which they disclosed that on 14.01.2024, quarrel ensued between the deceased persons and the accused party regarding crops of the field and then in the same night, they saw that the accused persons including the accused Santuram Baiga and Sukhsingh Baiga have committed murder of the deceased persons by giving axe blow and thereafter the house of the deceased persons started burning and they identified the accused persons there. The police registered the FIR and the accused persons have been arrested. During the investigation, the dead bodies were sent for postmortem and the cause of death of the deceased Budhram Baiga was opined that he died due to antemortem burn injuries. With respect to cause of death of deceased Hirmani Bai and Jolhuram, the doctor opined that cause and manner of death cannot be ascertained properly due to bodies being charred. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused persons including the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that, the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. There is no participation of the present applicant in the offence in question. She only standing on the spot along with others and her presence on the spot is quite natural, as she is a family member of accused persons. 3 There is no eyewitness to the incident that the present applicant has burnt the house of the deceased persons or made any assault by any weapon. He would further submit that the co-accused Budhwarin Bai Baiga has been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 06.01.2025, passed in MCRC No. 8843 of 2024 and the case of the present applicant is also similar to the case of Budhwarin Bai Baiga and she is also entitled for the same relief. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that there is statement of the witnesses, which clearly shows that the applicant exhorted for commission of the offence. In 161 and 164 CRPC statements of Bhukluram Baiga, her involvement in the offence in question is shown. From the 161 CRPC statement of Kamlesh Shriwas, Santosh Baiga, Bhagwat, Jagatram Baiga, Matwarin Bai, Rambai Baiga, Bhadlu Baiga, Siliya Bai, Samaro Bai and other witnesses, the involvement of the present applicant is prima facie there in the charge sheet. The allegation against the present applicant as well as the co-accused Budhwarin Bai Baiga are different and therefore the present applicant is not entitled for any parity with Budhwarin Bai Baiga. The bail application of other co- accused persons namely Akkal Baiga, Budhsingh Baiga, Miyaji and Sukhram Baiga has been dismissed by this Court. Looking to the seriousness of the offence and allegation against the present applicant, she is not entitled for bail. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Considering the submissions made by the parties, considering the material collected during the investigation and the allegation against the present applicant regarding her involvement in the offence in question, her presence on the spot, allegation of exhorting and the previous quarrel between the deceased and the present applicant with respect to the possession of the land, there is sufficient prima facie evidence, which makes her disentitle to be released on bail. The allegation against the present applicant and the co-accused Budhwarin Bai are also not similar and she is not entitled for any parity with her. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and the evidence available against the present applicant in the charge sheet, I am not inclined to release her on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of present applicant Rajobai Baiga is rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved