1 / 3 2025:CGHC:3489 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 523 of 2025 1 - Shriram Nishad S/o Dayaram Nishad Aged About 45 Years R/o Shakti Nagar, Peon Plot, Ward No. 18, Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) (Wrongly Mentioned A Shriram Nishad And Oth.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station House Officer, P.S. Mohan Nagar, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Purnendra Khichariya, Advocate For State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 20/01/2025 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 19/07/2024 in connection with Crime No. 338/2024, registered at Police Station Mohan Nangar, District Durg, C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 103 (1), 3 (5) of B.N.S. 2. The First Bail Application bearing M.Cr.C. No.9111 of 2024, was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 07/01/2025. ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.01.22 18:14:44 +0530 2 / 3 3. As per the prosecution case the complainant lodged a report on 19/07/2024 at about 12.30 PM alleging that in the morning the deceased Durgesh @ Genda Nishad has taken the mobile phone in which he inserted the SIM and stated that he will call to his father. Thereafter, the deceased went to take his food, however, when he did not return for two hours, then the applicant called him and reached to his house wherein the door was locked and the phone was ringing but the call was not received by the deceased. Thereafter, the applicant along with his friends broke the lock with the help of stone and when they went inside they saw that the deceased was on the floor and the electric wire was roped in his neck and he was died. During investigation the present applicant was arrested. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the prosecution has made a false case against the present applicant and the applicant has not committed any offence. He would next contend that on the basis of memorandum the police has made a false case against the applicant. He would lastly contend that the police has completed the investigation and the charge-sheet in this case has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 19/07/2024, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and would submit that there are three eye witnesses in this case who have seen the present applicant killing the deceased and the eye witnesses are the wife and children of the applicant and some land dispute was going on in between the applicant and the deceased. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 3 / 3 7. Considering the fact that there are eye witnesses in this case and it is a case of murder, therefore, looking to the gravity of offence committed by the applicant as the murder was committed by strangulation and there was a dispute of agricultural land between the deceased and the applicant, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application is rejected. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu