1 2025:CGHC:50431 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7451 of 2025 1. Pawan Kumar Patre S/o Guru Prasad Aged About 24 Years R/o Odadabri, Police Station- Kunda, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicant (In jail) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station, Mungeli, District-Mungeli (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gaurav Singhal, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 09.10.2025 1. This is third bail application on behalf of applicant under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakasha Sanhita in connection with Crime No.214/2023 registered at Police Station Mungeli District Mungeli (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B) of IPC. 2. First bail application bearing M.Cr.C. No.7951/2023 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 7.12.2023 with liberty to file after examination of seizure witnesses and second bail application bearing M.Cr.C. No.6064/2024 was SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI 2 dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 12.9.2024 with liberty to repeat the prayer at appropriate stage. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21.3.2023 Kotwar of village Devri (Sangwa) found lying dead body of a boy besides the road. When this news was spread in village, father of deceased also came on the spot, identified the dead body to be of his son Bhupendra Mathur and gave merg intimation to concerned police based on which aforementioned crime was registered against unknown persons. During course of investigation, applicant was arrested along with other co-accused persons. 4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant there is no direct evidence against applicant but for his memorandum statement and so called seizure at the instance of applicant of one battleaxe (tabbal) stained with blood. He contended that out of two seizure witnesses, one has been examined before trial Court and he has not supported the case of prosecution. Though summons was issued to second seizure witness for his presence, however, the summons received back with note that he went outstation for purpose of earning livelihood, as recorded in order sheet of trial court dated 19.2.2025 and since then no further summons has been issued by trial Court. To substantiate this submission, learned counsel referred to the order sheet of trial Court annexed along with 3 this application. He next contended that applicant has served more than two years of pre-trial detention and conclusion of trial is likely to take time. Hence, applicant may be enlarged on regular bail. 5. Learned State Counsel opposes submissions made by learned counsel for applicant and submits that there is seizure of weapon used for committing the offence in question at the instance of applicant and one of the seizure witness is yet to be examined. He also submits that weapon seized at the instance of applicant is found blood stained and in FSL report the blood is reported to be of human. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of case, nature of allegations, submissions of learned counsel for both sides and period of pre-trial detention, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned on the conditions that; a) he shall appear before the trial Court concerned regularly on each and every date unless exempted from appearance. 4 b) he shall not, in any manner, tamper with prosecution witnesses. c) if he is found involved in similar offence in future, it will be open for the State to apply for cancellation of bail. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/-