1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5705 of 2025 Hansraj Sethi S/o Rajdev Sethi Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Ghotiya, P.S. Lohandiguda, District Bastar C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Lohandiguda, District Bastar C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. P. K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 05.08.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.18/2024 registered at Police Station Lohandiguda, District Bastar (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 363, 364/34 of IPC. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 13.02.2024, complainant Gautam Verma lodged a report at PS Lohandiguda that co- accused Nitesh Kushwah has kidnapped his 9 years old son Ved Verma (now deceased). Co-accused Nitesh was taken into Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.08.06 10:42:32 +0530 2 custody and on interrogation, he disclosed that he along with the present applicant took deceased Ved Verma to Parapa forest and stabbed him in the neck with a knife. Based on the said report, the applicant was arrested on 14.02.2024. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that on the memorandum statement of co- accused Nitesh, the applicant has been arrested and on the memorandum statement of the applicant, a knife has been seized from an open place. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 14.02.2024 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest, therefore, considering all these facts, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application submits that pursuant to the memorandum statement of the applicant, the knife was seized and considering the nature of offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of offence and the material collected and available on record against the applicant, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected. 8. However, considering it to be an exceptional case as the applicant is in jail since 14.02.2024 and there are total 43 witnesses in this case, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 5 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 3 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai