1 2025:CGHC:33143 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5194 of 2025 1 - Mahendra Barle S/o Fankt Barle Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Katalbod P.S. Nandghat District - Bemetara, (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Nandghat District- Bemetara, (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Uttam Pandey, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Government Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 15/07/2025 1. This is the second bail application. The first bail application was dismissed vide order dated 05.07.2024 in M.Cr.C. No. 3874/2024. 2. This bail application is filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 161/2023 registered at Police Station – Nandghat, District – Bemetara, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 294, 506, 323, 324, 307 & 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. Case of prosecution is that, on 17.07.2023 at about 11:00 A.M., when the applicant along with others were dismantling the speed breaker of the road, it was objected by Tukeshwar. After hot talk, quarrel took place between them and in that process, all the accused persons assaulted SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY 2 Tukeshwar, Ravindra Kurre and Madhu Kurre by means of axe, crowbar and club. As a result, Tukeshwar suffered grievous injuries, including injury over his spinal bone. He was taken to hospital where during the course of treatment, he died on 14.08.2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submit that applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the instant crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged. He submits that this bail application is filed primarily on the ground of delay in trial, applicant is in jail since 19.08.2023 and as per the order-sheets filed along with the bail application in M.Cr.C. No. 5401/2025, it is appearing that the case was fixed for recording of evidence of the prosecution witnesses since January, 2024. There are as many as 37 witnesses, however, since last about 1 ½ years, only 18 witnesses have been examined. It is also appearing from the order-sheets that even after issuance of summons, the prosecution witnesses are not turning up. Hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that there are eye-witnesses to the incident and from the documents filed along with the bail application, it is appearing that the remaining prosecution witnesses could not be served on many of the dates of the hearing of case. However, he submits that there are specific allegations against the applicant in the statement recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. and is part of the case diary/charge-sheet. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 7. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, documents enclosed along with the bail application, I do not find present to be a fit case to allow the application for grant of bail. 3 8. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is dismissed. However, considering the submission of the counsel for the parties and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 19.08.2023 and the case is already fixed for evidence since month of January, 2024 and the order-sheets also reflects that on many of the dates of haring, the prosecution witnesses could not be served, learned Trial Court is directed to take all necessary steps for causing presence of the prosecution witnesses as available under the B.N,S.S., 2023 and make all efforts to conclude the trial at the earliest. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/-d/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey