1 / 3 2025:CGHC:50328 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7969 of 2025 • Payal Vishwas @ Moni W/o Shri Sanjay Vishwas Aged About 28 Years R/o Ward No. 1 Dharamjaygarh Colony, Thana And Tahsil - Dharamjaygarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh through Station House Officer, Police Station - Dharamjaygarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For Respondent-State For Complainant : : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Dy. Adv. General along with Mr. Kishan Sahu, Panel Lawyer Mr. Ashutosh Biswas, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 09/10/2025 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 34/2024 registered at Police Station – Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 302, 201, 120-B of IPC. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that merg was reported by concerned Hospital mentioning that Rajesh Biswas was brought to the hospital in a dead condition. Merg was enquired by concerned Police and based on merg enquiry police concluded that deceased was injected injection of anesthesia on six places of his chest by hatching criminal conspiracy by the accused persons. Applicant was arrested on 19.01.2024. PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, he has not committed offence as alleged. He further submits that there is no material against applicant to connect her with the crime. He submits that applicant is made accused only on memorandum statement of co-accused Priya Vishwas, however, during trial witnesses to memorandum statement have been examined and they have not supported the case of prosecution. It is also submitted that two other co-accused persons namely Sheikh Moin and Firiz Yadav have been granted bail in MCRC No. 7668/2025 and MCRC No. 7877/2025 respectively and case of applicant is also on similar footings. Applicant is a lady and she is in jail since 19.01.2024, hence she may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for applicant and would submit that apart from memorandum statement, police during investigation have collected CCTV footage of the hotel, from which it is appearing that applicant brought co-accused Firiz Yadav, nursing staff of Balaji Hospital who came by road just before the incident. He also contended that Police seized a register maintained by the Hotel of incoming guest and stayed in the hotel in which name of Atul Sheikh is mentioned with “Adl”, which means additional guest. However, on asking he submits that Atul Sheikh is not made accused in this case. The FSL report of CCTV Footage which is seized during Police investigation is still awaited and has not forming part of case diary and charge-sheet. It is contended that evidence of memorandum and seizure witnesses is subject matter of appreciation by learned trial Court. He also submits that in the statement recorded under Section 161 of CrPC, Vijay Sarkar it has come that applicant has transferred Rs. 5,000 in his account through PhonePay to transfer the same to Shiekh Moin to which he transferred. He however does not dispute the submission of learned counsel for applicant that two other co-accused persons namely Shiekh Moin and Firiz Yadav have been enlarged on bail by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents enclosed along with bail application. 6. Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for the parties, material collected by the police during course of investigation forming part of charge-sheet and 3 / 3 submission of parties that applicant is neighbour of deceased and the co- accused Priya Biswas, as also considering that applicant being a lady is in jail since 19.01.2024, without commenting anything on merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this bail application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE