1 2025:CGHC:18962 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2839 of 2025 1 - Vidhayak Paikra S/o Mahadani Paikra, Aged About 21 Years, R/o Village - Nawadih, P.S. - Kusmi, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Kusmi, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Non-applicant/Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Sahu, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 25-04-2025 1. Heard on the application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. This is first bail application before this Court filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail. The applicant has been arrested on 22-09-2024 in connection with Crime No.108/2024 registered at P.S. - Kusmi, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh for the offence under Section 190, 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 238 of B.N.S. 2. The case of prosecution is that, on 17-09-2024 father of the deceased lodged merg intimation to the police that on 14-09-2024 when his son/deceased was going along with his family members to enjoy the dance, on the way he went for answering the call of nature and fell into a well and has died. The dead body of deceased Rajesh Painkra was found in the well on 17-09-2024 and in postmortem injuries have been noticed by the doctor on his head and cause of death has been opined as due to throttling. The FIR has been registered and the present applicant along with other co- Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN 2 accused persons have been arrested. During the investigation one lathi has been seized from the present applicant and after investigation charge sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the father of the deceased has not disclosed any incident when he lodged merg intimation on 17-09-2024. There is no eye-witness to the incident, even there is no motive to commit murder of the deceased. The present applicant is brother-in-law of the deceased and it is only on suspicion he has been arrayed as accused in the present case. Further, no scientific evidence is available in the case against the present applicant. He is in jail since 22- 09-2024 and final adjudication of the case will take its own time. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State/non-applicant opposes and has submitted that there are two witnesses, namely, Amrita and Sushila who saw the accused persons beating the deceased when he was going along with them on 15- 09-2024 and thereafter, on 17-09-2024 his dead body was found into the well and cause of death is throttling and number of injuries have been found on his head. From the present applicant one danda has been seized and therefore, there is prima facie evidence available against the applicant and he is not entitled for bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegations and material collected during the investigation, further considering the gravity of offence as well as the statement of Amrita and Sushila as also that one danda has been seized from the applicant, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Consequently, this application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail is hereby rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil