1 2025:CGHC:46262 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6542 of 2025 Tapsya Kinnar Urf Mohmmad Imran S/o Rambhaij @ Haji Sultan Aged About 35 Years (As Mentioned In Final Report), Bhawani Nagar Kinnar Bhawan, Jora, Raipur, Police Station, Khamhardih, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station, City Kotwali, Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate For Respondent : Mrs. Pragya Shrivastava, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 10.09.2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 865/2024 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Baloda-Bazar (C.G.) for offence ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2025.09.11 10:35:08 +0530 2 punishable under Section 61(2), 103(1) and 238 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is on 19.11.2024 a dead body was seen by one Vinod Bhardwaj, who informed this to concerned Police Station. Based upon which, Police reached on spot and, thereafter registered the crime against unknown persons. During investigation, applicant was also arrested on 20.11.2024. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, she has not committed offence as alleged. He further submits that applicant was arrested only on the basis of memorandum statement. There is no seizure of any incriminating article from her possession. He also contended that witness to memorandum statement has been examined before trial Court and they have not supported the case of prosecution. He submits that only on the basis of memorandum statement, no person be held guilty of offence and be convicted. In support of his contention he places reliance upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Venkatesh @ Chandra Vs. State of Karnataka in CRA No. 1476-1477 of 2018. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for applicant and would submit that applicant appears to be the mastermind of the offence. She has engaged other person for committing murder of Kajal (deceased). She further contended that amount given by applicant has been seized in parts from Nisha, Himanshu, Kuldeep and Ankush. She furhter conteded that there was a phone call between Nisha and applicant, however she fairly 3 submits that phone call was not within the proximity of time of commission of alleged offence. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 6. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation against the application, submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties as also the period of detention, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings 4 against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE