1 2025:CGHC:41940 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1334 of 2025 1 - Rakesh Kumar Panika S/o Shri Chhotelal Panika Aged About 21 Years R/o Village Kalamdand, Village Panchayat Lalpur, Police Station Manendragarh, District Manendragarh- Chirmiri- Bharatpur (M.C.B.) (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Manendragarh District Koriya (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Vivek Bhakta, Advocate. For State : Shri Suyash Dhar, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Judgment on Board 19.08.2025 1. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred under Section 14(A)(ii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, 'the Act, 1989') against order dated 29.05.2025 passed by the Special Judge (Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe Prevention of Atrocities Act) Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya, whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.23/2024 registered at Police Station, Manendragarh, District Koriya, for the offence under Sections 302, 120-B,34 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Act, 1989, has been rejected. 2 2. Case of prosecution, in brief is that, on 28.08.2023 the deceased Lalu Prasad found dead in the abandoned house of one Jamuna Prasad. Merg was intimated by Govind Basor. On the postmortem, the Doctor has opined that final opinion with respect to death will be given after chemical analysis and toxicology report from FSL and as per the FSL report, ethyl alcohol and aluminum phosphate insecticide found present in the viscera of the body of the deceased. FIR has been registered and after investigation the present appellant as well as co-accused who is juvenile in conflict with law have been arrested and charge sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there is no direct evidence against the appellant that he administered poison to the deceased. There is no evidence that the present appellant is having any animosity or motive to commit his murder by poisoning. Even no any incriminating article or poison has been seized from the present appellant. The complainant Govind Basor and other relevant witnesses have been examined before the trial court where they have not supported the prosecution case about the fact that they have seen the appellant and deceased together at the relevant point of time. He would also submit that juvenile in conflict with law have been released on bail by this court and the case of present appellant is also similar to the case of juvenile in conflict with law. The appellant is in jail since 19.01.2024. Out of total 24 witnesses only 5 witnesses have been examined till date and final adjudication of the case will take sometime. Therefore, the appeal may be allowed and the appellant may be enlarged on bail. 3 4. On the other hand the counsel for the State vehemently opposes the submission so made and submits that there are statement of mother of deceased Smt. Kanchaniya Bai, cousin brother of the deceased Ojha Prasad, brother of the deceased, sister of the deceased Ku. Mankumari and one Jamuna Prasad who are the witness that both the accused persons took the deceased with them for consuming liquor and thereafter the dead body of deceased was found. There is statement of one Jagdish Singh @ Badku who seen them together consuming liquor in the house of Jamuna Prasad where the dead body was found. There is evidence of motive that sister of juvenile in conflict with law eloped with her neighbour and therefore the juvenile in conflict with law was having suspicion on the sister of the deceased that she helped her in eloping and for that reason there was quarrel between these two families. He would further submit that on the basis of postmortem report as well as FSL report the liquor contents and insecticides were found present on the viscera of the deceased. Further, Sulphas tablet has been seized from juvenile in conflict with law who was seen in the company of the present appellant and the deceased. Thus, there is sufficient evidence against the appellant on record and the trial of the case is in progress and therefore the appellant is not entitled for bail. 5. Pursuant to order dated 18.07.2025, the complainant appeared through virtual mode from DSLA Manendragarh and raised objection in granting bail to the appellant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 7. Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegations and material collected during investigation, further considering the statement of witnesses Smt. Kanchaniya Bai, Govind Basor, Ojha Prasad, Ku. Mankumari, Jamuna Prasad and Jagdish Singh @ Badku and further the postmortem and FSL report of the deceased, seizure of Sulphas Tablet from juvenile in conflict with law and further that trial of the case is in progress, I am not inclined to release the appellant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is rejected. However, considering the fact that appellant is in jail since 19.01.2024, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and make all endeavor to conclude the same as early as possible. 9. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the trial court concerned for its compliance. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder