1 2025:CGHC:3856 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 622 of 2025 1 - Tuman Lal Sahu S/o Late Chandan Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Village- Bijetala, P.S. Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer (S.H.O.), P.S.- Ghumka, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ----Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Akshat Tiwari, Advocate For-Non-applicant : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 22.01.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with Crime No. 64/2024, registered at Police Station Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Section 302 & 201of the IPC. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that, as per prosecution story, a dead body of Late Smt. Kanti Bai Sahu was found in the well Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.01.23 10:54:56 +0530 2 nearby her house. FIR was lodged under Section 302 & 201 of IPC against unknown persons, where during investigation, the applicant/accused Tuman Lal Sahu was arrested for assaulting his own mother deceased Kanti Bai and throwing her body in the well near the house. 3. It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant had already left the house prior to the alleged incident, there was no any quarrel or dispute between the deceased mother and her son. As a matter of fact, there were land disputes regarding the Patanjali Factory taking over the lands of the applicant’s family and another body was also found in the well in May 2024 (FIR No. 79/2024) where the family of the deceased was also contesting against the Patanjali Factory which is pending before the SDM(Rev.). He further submits that the prosecution has not collected any documents, which may show involvement of applicant in commission of assault made by him. The applicant is in jail since 24.04.2024. Though, the trial is in progress, till date, the same has not been concluded, thus he prays that the present applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is ample evidence on record to connect the applicant with commission of the offence. Further charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant and 10 witnesses have already been examined. The present applicant 3 assaulted his mother with a hammer and had threw her in well and due to which she died. For which, the applicant has not given any plausible explanation, therefore, his bail application is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary produced by the learned counsel for the State. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of offence and further considering the fact the present applicant assaulted the his mother with a hammer and had threw her in well and due to which she died and further charge-sheet has already been filed and 10 witnesses have already been examined, without any observation on the merits, at this stage role played by the applicant cannot be distinguished, as it would depend after all the witnesses are meticulously examined therefore, the aforesaid bail application of applicant is rejected. 7. However, this Court hope and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, if there is no legal impediment. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti