1 2025:CGHC:60002 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10183 of 2025 1. Poonamchand Patel S/o Late Firanta Patel Aged About 42 Years R/o Sakin Sivnikala Police Station Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) 2. Sudama Dewangan S/o Late Panchram Dewangan Aged About 29 Years R/o Bazar Chowk Bakali, Police Station Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through O昀케cer - In- Charge Kurud, Police Station Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) --Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Hemant Kumar Agrawal, Advocate. For-Non-applicant : Mr. Ajit Singh, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Vema, Judge Order on Board 10/12/2025 1. This is the First bail application 昀椀led under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 256/2024 registered at Police Station Kurud District Dhamtari (C.G.), for the o昀昀ence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120(B), 34 of the IPC 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 14.05.2024 the accused persons including the present applicant hatched conspiracy for committing murder of the deceased Firanta Patel and in furtherance of that conspiracy, the accused persons committed murder of Firanta Patel by strangulation. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicants have neither hatched any conspiracy, nor committed murder of deceased Firanta Patel, prosecution witnesses have been examined before the trial Court and Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.12.16 18:56:25 +0530 2 have not supported the case of the prosecution and they turned hostile, prosecution has cited 36 witnesses therefore, the trial will take more time, hence he prays for release on bail to the applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants and submits that o昀昀ence committed by the applicants is grievous in nature. Hence, they are not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. Looking to the seriousness of the o昀昀ence and particularly to the fact that there are clear evidences which shows the conspiracy of the murder of the deceased. Hence it depicts that it was a pre-planned murder of the deceased in which the applicant was involved. 18 witnesses witnesses have already been examined before the trial Court. This Court does not 昀椀nd any justi昀椀able ground to grant bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. O昀케ce is directed to provide a certi昀椀ed copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information. 8. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove is only for the purpose of deciding the bail application and the trial Court will decide the case on its own merit without being in昀氀uenced by any observation made hereinabove. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti