2025:CGHC:48867 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1832 of 2025 Ishwari Sahu W/o Shri Sevakram Sahu Aged About 52 Years R/o Ward No. 03, Bhatapara, Sursabandha, Police Station Rajim District - Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Appellant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station Rajim District - Gariyaband (C.G.). ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Appellant : Shri Dashrath Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Vivek Sharma, PL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 23.09.2025 1. Pursuant to order dated 09.09.2025, mother of the victim appeared through virtual mode from the concerned DLSA, and raised her objection in granting bail to the appellant. Her objection has been taken on record. 2. Present appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, ‘SC/ST Act’) has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 12.08.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Raipur, District-Raipur, CG, in Case No.30 of 2025, whereby the regular bail application of the appellant filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS 2023) has been rejected. Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.09.25 10:50:52 +0530 Cra 1832 of 2025 2 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that deceased- Kum.Yogita Sonwani was residing with her mother, and she was differently able girl. Her treatment was held at Raipur hospital, and some of the villagers have suggested mother of the victim to get her daughter’s treatment by the present appellant, because, she is treating mental patients by herbal treatment in her house. When the complainant/mother of the victim contacted her, she started the treatment to her daughter by giving foot massage on her chest by applying oil, and hot water. She also pressurized her to pray for a particular religion, and not to disclose the same to anyone. During the treatment, when the daughter of the complainant feels pain, she assaulted her, and used to force them to adopt particular religion. Condition of the victim started deteriorating, and ultimately, she died on 22.05.2025. Thereafter, FIR has been registered by the complainant. In the post-mortem report, certain injuries have been found on the body of the deceased, and the doctor opined that mode of death is due to cardio respiratory arrest, and homicidal in nature. Offence has been registered, and the applicant has been arrested. After completion of investigation, charge- sheet has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that appellant is innocent, and has been falsely implicated in the offense. She bonafidely treating the patients by applying herbal oil, which is beneficial to them. She never pressurized anyone to adopt particular religion, and not committed any cruelty to anyone. It is the physical condition of the deceased, that she could not recover despite her treatment, and she ultimately died. There is no offence committed by the appellant. Appellant is a lady, and is in jail since 23.05.2025. Investigation has been completed, and charge-sheet has been filed. Final Cra 1832 of 2025 3 adjudication of the case will take some more time. Therefore, appellant may be enlarged on bail. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant and would submit that from the statement of the witnesses, the offence of the appellant clearly spells, and the manner in which she treated the deceased, and pressurized the complainant to adopt a particular religion, injuries found on the body of the deceased, therefore, appellant is not entitled for bail. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case-diary. 7. Considering the nature of offence, and the material collected during the investigation, further considering the postmortem report of the deceased, statement of witnesses- Sunita Sonwani, mother of the victim; Tejram Baghel, maternal uncle of the victim, Rekhram Baghel, maternal uncle of the victim; Tukan Baghel, maternal uncle of the victim; Smt Koushalya Baghel, aunt of the victim, Deepak Kumar Jangde, brother-in-law of the victim, Rahul Baghel, cousin brother of the victim, and also from the other witnesses, who are closely related with the family of the deceased, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant is not entitled for release on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the appellant- Ishwari Sahu, w/o Sevakram Sahu is hereby dismissed. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma