1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7450 of 2025 1 - Brijlal Netam S/o Late Jalsingh Netam Aged About 26 Years R/o Churki- dadar, Police Station- Chhura, District- Gariyaband (C.G.). ... Applicant Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Chhura, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Shri Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 22.09.2025 1. This is first bail application seeking grant of bail to the Applicant who is in jail since 01.11.2022 in connection with Crime No.161/2022 regis- tered at Police Station Chhura, District Gariyaband for the offence pun- ishable under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. 2. As per prosecution case, on 17.10.2022 a missing report was lodged by the son of deceased that his father namely Govind Netam is missing since 03.10.2022. During enquiry of missing person, the son of de- ceased informed the police that in a pit dug by the forest department in Jungle, they suspected a dead body. After due formalities, decom- posed dead body was exhumed and after obtaining postmortem report, 2 an FIR for the offence under Sections 302 and 201 IPC was registered against unknown person. During investigation, the applicant was taken into custody and his memorandum statement was recorded based on which a Knife and Danda was seized from the applicant. He was ar- rested and after investigation charge sheet was filed. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that there is no evi- dence against the applicant that he committed murder of the deceased and buried the dead body in a pit. Even there is no motive to commit his murder. There is no eyewitness to the incident and the case of pros- ecution is solely based upon memorandum statement of the applicant which is inadmissible in evidence. The applicant is in jail since 01.11.2022. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail as final adjudication may take sometime because till date only six witnesses have been examined. 4. On the other hand the counsel for the State opposes the bail applica- tion and have submitted that witnesses have stated about the motive that deceased was engaged in playing witchcraft upon the applicant and for that reason he prepared a plan to commit murder of the de- ceased by knife and initially he put the dead body under the stone and subsequently thrown the dead body in a pit dug by the forest depart- ment in Jungle and buried the same. Knife and Danda was seized from the applicant. The statement of Manimati, granddaughter of the de- ceased as well as Charan Singh clearly spells about the threatening given by the applicant to the deceased. Thus, he is not entitled for bail as sufficient material is available against him. 5. I have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the submissions made by the parties, the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation and material collected during investigation, the gravity of offence and the fact that out of 24 witnesses, 4 witnesses have already been examined, this Court is of the opinion that present is not a fit case where the Applicant can be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is rejected. However, con- sidering the fact that applicant is in jail since 01.11.2022, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as pos- sible. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to concerned trial court of its compliance. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder