1 2025:CGHC:30705 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4535 of 2025 1 - Human Joshi S/o Santosh Joshi, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Jogipara, Birejhar, Police Station - Nandini Nagar, District - Durg (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, P.S. - Nandini Nagar, District - Durg (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 04/07/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 181/2024 registered at Police Station – Nandini Nagar, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 of BNS, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the merg intimation was lodged on 10.07.2024 disclosing the fact that deceased SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2025.07.07 10:23:15 +0530 2 Tejashwani Joshi died because of sinking in the pond at Village Madesara and thereafter FIR was registered against the applicant on 21.07.2024 alleging that applicant was fiance of deceased and prior to their marriage quarrel was taken place in between both of them and applicant pushed the deceased into the pond because of which she died. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case, with no connection to the alleged offence. It is further contended that there was no quarrel or dispute between the applicant and the deceased, instead, their relationship was loving and cordial. The charge-sheet lacks any eyewitness, and no incriminating material was seized from the applicant’s possession. The FIR was registered solely based on the merg intimation, leading to the applicant’s arrest. Notably, out of 26 witnesses, 14 have turned hostile upon examination. The applicant is in jail since 22.07.2024 and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application, submitting that out of 26 witnesses, only 14 have been examined, therefore, at this state, he may not be enlarged on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature 3 and gravity of the offence, and also taking into account that the case is based on circumstantial evidence rather than direct evidence, coupled with the fact that out of 26 witnesses, 14 have turned hostile upon examination, and no incriminating material has been seized from the applicant’s possession and he is in jail since 22.07.2024. The trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.