1 2025:CGHC:32798 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5104 of 2025 1 - Deva Vishwakarma S/o Firoz Vishwakarma Aged About 23 Years R/o Village Bhikhmgali, Birgaon, P.S. Urla, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through P.S. Urla, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Amit Matre, Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Priya Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 14 / 07 / 2025 1. The accused/applicant has moved this first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 281/2024 registered at Police Station – Urla, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 103(1) of BNS, 2023. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.07.15 10:35:37 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 17.08.2024, complainant Poonam Soni lodged a report alleging therein that on the date of offence i.e. 17.08.2024 at about 9:00 pm, she along with her brother Santosh Soni sit in her house, at that time, their neighbour, accused/appellant came there and abused her brother and with intention to commit murder assaulted the deceased by hands and fists and also pushed her brother, due to which the deceased fall down from the roof and sustained grievous injuries on his head and died. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He also submits that even if the entire charge sheet is considered, the allegation levelled only attracts Section 105(1) of BNS as an important element of criminal intent is missing, and the death was caused as a result of falling from the roof where a sudden fight occurred between the applicant and the deceased. He further submits that only 5 witnesses out of 16 witnesses have been examined till date, out of which 4 witnesses have turned hostile and do not support the case of the prosecution. The applicant is in jail since 19.08.2024, and there is no likelihood of his case being decided in the near future, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there are 3 eyewitnesses; therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the material available on record and the evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected. 7. However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 19.08.2024, it is an exceptional case, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 4 months from today. 8. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu