Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35587 (CHH)

JETHIYA BAI MARKAM v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/5701/2025 · 2025-08-03

Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:38400 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5701 of 2025 1 - Jethiya Bai Markam W/o Bhawan Singh Markam Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Khongsara, Chowki - Belgahna P.S. Kota, Distt. Bilaspur, C.G. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - S.H.O., Chowki Belgahna, P.S. Kota, Distt. - Bilaspur, C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 04 / 08 / 2025 1. The accused/applicant has moved this first bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing her on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 60/2024 registered at Police Chowki – Belgahna, Police Station - Kota, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of IPC. Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2025.08.05 10:29:25 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution’s case, on 14.01.2024, merg information of the death of Khushbu Yadav was given by co-accused Bhawan Singh Markam. On the basis of Merg intimation, merg inquiry was conducted, and statements of witnesses Rohit Markam, husband of the deceased, Rameshwari Markam and brother-in-law, Ghanshyam Markam, were recorded in which it came to know that applicant, Jethiya Bai and co-accused Bhawan Singh committed murder of his daughter-in-law, deceased, Khusbhu Yadav on 13.01.2024 at 10:30 pm, on account of dispute with regard to property. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant along with another co-accused. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that nothing has been seized from the applicant and there is no eye witness in this case. He also submits that the applicant is a lady and is in jail since 18.01.2024, and there is no likelihood of her case being decided in the near future; therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the present applicant committed the murder by strangulating her throat and mouth of her daughter-in-law on account of property 3 dispute along with co-accused Bhawan Singh, there are 23 witnesses in this case out of which only 13 witnesses have been examined till date and some important witnesses are still remained to be examined; therefore, at this stage, she 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, the evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the nature of crime, at this stage, 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 a lady and is in jail since 18.01.2024, and only 13 witnesses out of 23 witnesses have been examined till date, 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 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