1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7135 of 2025 Pankaj Kumar Manhare S/o Rajendra Manhare, Aged About 20 Years R/o Khapradih (Dhivanpuri) P.S. Hathband, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ……Applicant. versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Hathband, District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ...... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Prachi Singh, Advocates For Respondent-State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 09/09/2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 244/2024 registered at Police Station – Hathband, District – Balodabazar – Bhatapara (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 103 (1), 238, 115 (2) of B.N.S. and Section 25, 27 of Arms Act. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that one Shivdhan Nishad lodged a report on 28.12.2024 stating therein that applicant has assaulted deceased Pawan Nishad by means of club and knife due to which he BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.09.10 10:49:10 +0530 2 died. Based upon report, aforementioned crime was registered against applicant and he was arrested on 28.12.2024. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed any offence as alleged against him. She submits that so called eye-witnesses Suraj Nishad and Shivdhan Nishad have examined before the trial Court and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. Applicant is in jail since 28.12.2024 and trial may take sometime. Hence, applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and the submission made by learned counsel for applicant. She submits that there are four eye-witness to the incident namely Shivdhan Nishad, Suraj Nishad, Sonu Nishad and Roman Nishad. She submits that deposition of Suraj Nishad (P.W.1) and Shivdhan Nishad (P.W.-2) is only placed on record, which shows that statement of Sonu Nishad and Roman Nishad are yet to be recorded before trial Court. She also pointed out that Shivdhan Nishad (P.W.-2) supported the case in his examination in chief and his statement recorded under Section 180 of BNSS that he saw applicant assaulting deceased, applicant also followed deceased and thereafter assaulted him by means of knife. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with bail application. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for respective parties that two eye-witenss Sonu Nishad and Roman Nishad have not been examined till date and taking into consideration the evidence of 3 Shivdhan Nishad I do not find present to be a fit case to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Balram