1 2025:CGHC:45885 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7154 of 2025 Rahul Namdev S/o Pankaj Namdev Aged About 21 Years R/o Chakrbhatha Camp, Ward No. 11, P.S. Chakarbhatha, Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho, P.S. Sirgitti Distt. - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ...... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. For Objector : Mr. A.K. Yadav, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 09/09/2025 1. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 942/2024 registered at Police Station – Sirgitti, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 296, 308 (4) of B.N.S. The first bail application of applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 07.05.2025 in M.Cr.C. No. 1841 of 2025. 2. Learned counsel for applicant submits that this second bail application is filed on the ground of delay in trial. Prosecution witnesses are not turning up and they are intentionally avoiding the service of summons BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.09.11 10:48:24 +0530 2 upon them and thus there is delay in trial. Hence, it is prayed that applicant may be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for objector opposes the bail application and submission advanced by learned counsel for applicant. It is submitted that after receipt of summons, witnesses are appearing in the Court. 4. Perusal of the order-sheet, which is placed on record would show that when even after service of summons to family members, they could not appear for their examination before the trial Court, bailable warrant was issued vide order dated 01.07.2025 against Laxmi Yadav, Laxminarayan and Manishankar. Learned trial Court further taking note of order passed by this Court for early disposal of criminal case pending in its order dated 11.07.2025 have fixed the case for evidence on 24.07.2025. From the order-sheet it is also appearing that against Manishankar arrest warrant was also issued by learned trial Court for causing his presence to record the evidence. 5. From the aforementioned facts of the case, it is appearing that learned trial Court is taking all necessary steps for causing presence of prosecution witnesses, therefore, I do not find any good ground to allow this application. 6. Accordingly, bail application filed by applicant is dismissed at this stage. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Balram