1 2025:CGHC:41111 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5844 of 2025 Sudha Ram S/o Baijnath Yadav Aged About 34 Years R/o Samdama, Police Station- Tapkara, District- Jashpur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Tapkara, District- Jashpur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Harish Khuntiya, Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 14/08/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 91/2024, registered at Police Station – Tapkara, District- Jashpur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS. 2. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 17.08.2024 at around 2:00 PM, in front of house of the Sarpanch, Farsabahar, District Jashpur (C.G.), the applicant allegedly assaulted one Santosh Yadav who was the brother-in-law of the applicant with an axe (Tangiya) on back side of his neck, head and waist due to which Santosh sustained grievous SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2025.08.14 16:55:38 +0530 2 injuries and died. Based on above, offense was registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that examined witnesses have been turned hostile. The applicant is in jail since 18.08.2024, out of 21 prosecution witnesses, only 6 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that this case is of direct evidence and eye-witness. The weapon (Tangiya) has been sized from the applicant. Hence, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the fact that key witnesses remain to be examined, at this stage, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham