1 2025:CGHC:33002 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5101 of 2025 1 - Pawan Kumar Meravi S/o Sukhuram Aged About 33 Years R/o Village- Singhari, Police Station- Bodla, District- Kabirdham Chhattisgarh 2 - Jainbati W/o Pawan Meravi Aged About 35 Years R/o Village- Singhari, Police Station- Bodla, District- Kabirdham Chhattisgarh 3 - Sukartin Bai W/o Bajru Singh Markam Aged About 35 Years R/o Village- Badna, Police Station- Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 15/07/2025 1. The applicants have preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with crime No. 52/2025, SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.07.16 18:18:49 +0530 2 registered at Police Station – Kukdur, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 103 (1) of BNS. 2. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 18.04.2025 at around 7:00 AM, Sukartein Markam went to call her father-in-law, Kariya Markam (now deceased), for tea. There she found him lying on a cot with dried blood beneath it. The mosquito net near his head was stained with blood. She noticed a severe injury on his head, and he had already passed away. Based on the information provided by informant Sukartein Markam, a merg was registered. During the merg inquiry, it was found that the accused Pawan and Jainbati had visited Sukartein’s house. During dinner, Pawan demanded money and rahar dal from the deceased Kariya Markam for his sister’s marriage. When he refused, a verbal altercation ensued between them. Thereafter, Pawan strangled Kariya Markam, rendering him unconscious. Subsequently, the accused dragged Kariya Markam to the granary, laid him on a cot with the help of the other accused/applicants, and then Pawan struck the deceased on the head with a farsa causing his death. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. There is no direct evidence available on record against the applicants and they have been implicated only on the basis of circumstantial evidence. He further submits that the applicants are in jail since 25.04.2025, charge-sheet has not been filed and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient evidence available on record against the applicants, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicants may not be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant, the nature of offence 3 and the fact that charge-sheet has not been filed, at this stage, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicants on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham