1 2025:CGHC:50994 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7745 of 2025 1 - Deepak Sahu S/o Itawari Sahu Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Bami, P.S.- Singhanpuri Jangal, Distt.- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer P.S.- Singhanpuri Jangal, Distt.- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For applicant (s) : Mr. Dinesh Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 13.10.2025 1. This is the first bail application seeking the grant of regular bail to the applicant who is in jail since 05-06-2025, in connection with Crime No. 32 of 2025, registered at Police Station Singhanpuri Jungle, District Kabirdham, for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on the intervening night of 04-05/06/2025, the deceased Jhadiram Sahu was murdered by setting him ablaze by pouring petrol upon him, when he was sleeping in his house. The FIR was SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.10.14 17:55:22 +0530 2 registered, and during the investigation, it was found that the applicant had caused the murder of his own grandfather, Jhadiram Sahu, over the issue of the property dispute. The applicant was arrested on 05-06-2025, and a charge sheet was filed against him. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence. There is no eyewitness to the incident, and there are other inmates of the house who were also present on the date of the incident. Immediately after the incident, when the family members asked the deceased, he did not allege that the present applicant had set him ablaze. Even the statement of the wife of the deceased, who was also there at the relevant time, did not allege the applicant. After about 02 days of the incident, it is alleged that the applicant has disclosed the incident committed by him, which is unnatural and highly improbable. There is no reason to commit murder of the deceased by the applicant. The memorandum statement is inadmissible in evidence, and there is no sufficient evidence against him in the charge sheet. The applicant has been in jail since 05-06-2025, and final adjudication of the case will take its own time. He has no criminal antecedents. Therefore, he may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the state opposes the bail application and submits that in the memorandum statement of the applicant, he disclosed the fact of the commission of the offence and the manner in which he committed it. The applicant is also received burn injuries while committing the offence, and petrol smell was also found on his clothes, which were seized by the police. There is a motive to commit murder as the deceased wanted to sell his land, for which a dispute was going on with the father of the applicant, and therefore, he committed his murder. There are statements of Budhiyarin Bai (wife of the deceased), Nohar Sahu (son of the deceased), Harihar Sahu (neighbour), Gorelal, Santram, Chintaram, Kansram, Amar Singh, Aakeshwar Sahu, and Smt. Tijkunwar Sahu, in the form of extra 3 extrajudicial confession. Therefore, there is ample evidence 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 the learned counsel for the parties, nature of the offence and the material collected during the investigation, further considering the manner in which the offence was committed, the applicant has also received burn injury in his little finger, petrol smell was found in his clothes which has been seized by the police, his present in the house at the relevant time and also the statements of the Budhiyarin Bai (wife of the deceased), Nohar Sahu (son of the deceased), Harihar Sahu (neighbour), Gorelal, Santram, Chintaram, Kansram, Amar Singh, Aakeshwar Sahu, and Smt. Tijkunwar Sahu, who stated that on being asked, the applicant disclosed about the commission of the offence, and also the gravity of the offence that the deceased was set ablaze when he was sleeping in his house, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the application for the grant of bail to the applicant Deepak Sahu is rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika