1 2025:CGHC:36602 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5624 of 2025 Kawaldev @ Matan S/o Nanheshwar Kisan, Aged About 41 Years R/o Saruwat Keratoli, P.S. Bhandariya, District Gadwa (Jharkhand) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station Chando, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Dashrath Kushwaha, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy.Government Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 28.07.2025 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No.40/2025 registered at Police Station Chando, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G) for the offence punishable under sections 302, 201/34 of IPC. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the applicant was suspecting that the deceased Sukhmani was doing witchcraft against his children and on 07.11.2023 when the deceased was found alone near Malpahari Pahad Water-fall, she was strangulated to death by the present applicant and his wife Bajanti Bai and thereafter her body was thrown over the waterfall. A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.08.01 15:14:47 +0530 2 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that neither there is any eye-witness to the incident nor is there any incriminating evidence against the applicant to connect him with the crime in question and only on suspicion, he and his wife have been roped in the crime. He submits that since the applicant and deceased are neighbors and there being a previous dispute between the two parties, he and his wife have been falsely implicated and further there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 02.09.2024 and till date, out of 19 witnesses, only 3 have been examined and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, looking to the his custody period, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that from the version of one Anuranjan Agariya, the fact has emerged that the accused was last seen with the deceased. 5. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on regular bail at this stage. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 6. However, looking to the custody period of the applicant, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and ensure that the trial is completed as early as possible. 7. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court for information and necessary action. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao 3