1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7210 of 2025 1 - Ganesh Ram Dahariya S/o Ghasiram Dahariya Aged About 67 Years R/o Village Kosamdih, P.S. - Masturi, Tehsil - Masturi, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Masturi, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Maneesh Kumar Bhardwaj, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 16/09/2025 1. This is the third bail application of the applicant who has been arrested on 11.04.2024 in connection with Crime No. 181/2024, registered at Police Station Masturi for the offence under Section 307 of IPC. 2. The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed on merits vide order dated 26.06.2024 passed in MCRC No. 3988/2024, thereafter, second bail application of the applicant was again dismissed vide order dated 16.01.2025 passed in MCRC No. 414/2025, while dismissing the second bail application the learned trial Court was directed to expedite the trial, thereafter, till date total 08 witnesses have been examined. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the complainant has not fully supported the prosecution case, the weapon of offence has not been seized even the bicycle on which the applicant is said to have come on the ALOK SHARMA Digitally signed by ALOK SHARMA Date: 2025.09.17 10:51:44 +0530 2 spot has not been seized by the police. The other witnesses have turned hostile, the applicant is aged about 67 years and he is in jail since 11.04.2024, the trial is not in considerable progress and will take its own time, therefore, he has filed the third bail application. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes and submitted that total 08 witnesses have been examined till date and trial is in progress, looking to the injuries caused by the victim by iron rod and also in view of the statement of the victim, the applicant is not entitled for bail. She would further submits that some of the material including the doctor who treated the victim is yet to be examined, therefore, there is no change in circumstances in the facts that earlier two bail applications of the applicant has been dismissed on merits, therefore, he is not entitled for bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the bail application. 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering that nature of allegation and further considering that two bail applications of the applicant has been dismissed on merits and the material witnesses including the doctor is yet to be examined, I am not inclined to consider it to be any change in circumstances. 7. In view of the above, the third bail application of the applicant is dismissed. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok