1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7444 of 2025 1 - Pappu Ram Netam S/o Kritram Netam Aged About 28 Years R/o Tumgaon, Ps- Tumgaon, Dist- Mahasamund (C.G.) At Present - Sambalpur, Ps- Bhanupratappur, Dist North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- SHO, PS- Bande,distt- North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Respondents For Applicant : Shri Rakesh Thakur, Advocate. For Respondent : Shri Sanjeev Pandey, Dy. Advocate General. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 24.09.2025 1. This is first bail application seeking grant of bail to the Applicant who is in jail since 23.02.2024 in connection with Crime No.16/2024 registered at Police Station Bande, District North Bastar Kanker for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 420,120-B,201,467,468 and 471 IPC. 2. As per prosecution case, on 02.02.2024 a complaint was made by Rajesh Khaswa to the Additional Superintendent of Police, Pakhanjur that death of his Aunt late Rani Pathariya is not an accidental death by Snake biting, but it was a pre-planed murder planned by the daughter of the deceased Savita Pathariya, grandson Akash and the LIC Agent Tarak Devnath and shown her death due to Snake biting. The matter was inquired by Additional Superintendent of Police Pakhanjur and it 2 was found that Tarak Devnath, LIC Agent, have abetted the grandson of deceased Akash Pathariya that there is a policy gain of double benefit of the sum assured of the policy holder if the policy holder dies in an accidental death and the nominee will get the double amount of the sum assured. Tarak Devnath helped Akash in preparing Pan Card, Income tax return and Adhar Card of the deceased Rani Pathariya. Akash Pathariya purchased a policy for a sum of rupees 50 Lakhs in the name of his maternal grandmother Rani Pathariya vide policy No.384839304 which starts from 26.12.2022, yearly premium of which was Rs.3,11,085/-. An account has also been opened in the name of Rani Pathariya at State Bank of India, Bande Branch in which the mother of Akash Pathariya i.e. daughter of Rani Pathariya, have been made nominee. Bank account of Savita Pathariya was also opened on 24.07.2023 at Bank of Baroda, Branch Pakhanjur which was operated by Akash Pathariya. After purchasing LIC policy in the name of Rani Pathariya, in order to receive double amount of sum assured i.e. more than one Crore rupees, they conspired together, hired a Snake Charmer, taken the deceased from her house to the place where Snake charmer was present, got snake bite on the deceased Rani Pathariya and again taken Rani Pathariya in her house, laid her on the cot, and went away to PV-85 in a function. He returned to his house at about 10 pm and misguided his mother that due to weak health condition she is sleeping. At about 12:30 in the night he started shouting that snake has bitten her maternal grandmother, shown the neighborers snake bit on her Ankle and thereafter taken her to the hospital where she was declared dead. 3 3. The co-accused, Tarak Devnath, LIC agent, have not informed the police about such a huge amount of her life insurance and engaged in the process of settlement of the insurance claim. In a very short span of time without being any objection, the death claim of deceased Rani Pathariya has been sanctioned and on 15.11.2023 an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- have been deposited in the bank account of Savita Pathariya which was running at Bank of Baroda through cheque number 87170100010864. On the same day an amount of Rs.52,20,000/-have also been deposited by the office of LIC towards death claim. Thus, a total amount of Rs.1,02,20,000/-have been deposited in the bank account of Savita Pathariya against death claim of late Rani Pathariya. Immediately thereafter on 17.11.2023 an amount of Rs.2,07,200/-was given to the LIC agent/Tarak Devnath through cheque No.000016, dated 17.11.2023; Rs.10,00,000/- was given to Maa Kali Petrol Pump, Pakhanjur through cheque and an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- was withdrawn from the Bank account. He also purchased some gold ornaments from the said amount. It was also found that driver of Scorpio vehicle Prashanjit Guha have also made statement that he is an eyewitness to the incident of snake biting and found that maternal grandson of the deceased Rani Pathariya have conspired with the LIC agent Tarak Devnath and other persons and have committed the offence to obtain the insurance claim of the deceased Rani Pathariya, the investigating officer recommended for registration of FIR. 4. Based on the inquiry report, the FIR has been registered against Akash Pathariya, Tarak Devnath, present applicant Pappu Ram Netam and others. During investigation, the statement of witnesses have been 4 recorded. The documents have been seized and the applicant has been arrested on 23.02.2024. 5. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no evidence against the present applicant with respect to active involvement of applicant in the alleged offence. He is only a Snake Charmer and never came in contact with the other co-accused. He is having no nexus either with the alleged offence or with the co-accused. It is only when the deceased died due to Snake Bite, on suspicion the applicant has been implicated in the offence. Initially the merg was reported to the police, the police inquired the matter and submitted a closure report on 10.07.2023. Subsequently, on 02.02.2024 a complaint has been lodged by the Nephew of the deceased which was again inquired and FIR has been lodged. In the earlier enquiry there was no evidence against the applicant. There is no allegation that present applicant has also received any amount from the benefits of LIC policy of the deceased. The applicant is not having any personal interest with the family affairs of deceased and have not gained any amount from Akash Pathariya. The applicant is in jail since 23.02.2024; final adjudication of the case will take its own time and therefore he may be enlarged on bail. 6. On the other hand the counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there are sufficient evidence against the applicant that he being Snake Charmer provided Snake Bite to the deceased on the instance of other accused persons. Prasanjeet Guha, driver of vehicle, have duly stated involvement of present applicant. The manner in which the accused persons have conspired together and committed the offence, the applicant is not entitled for bail. He 5 would also submit that bail application of other co-accused Tarak Devnath has been rejected twice vide order dated 28.06.2024 in MCrC No.4048 of 2024 and on 25.06.2025 in MCrC No.4863 of 2025 and therefore the present applicant is also not entitled for bail. 7. I have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material annexed with the bail application. 8. Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the nature of allegation against the present applicant, the manner in which the offence has been committed by the accused persons, the evidence available against the present applicant in the charge sheet and also considering the fact that bail application of co-accused Tarak Devnath have already been rejected by this court, this Court is of the opinion that present is not a fit case where the Applicant can be enlarged on bail. 9. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder