1 / 3 2025:CGHC:57209 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9061 of 2025 Pushpa Banjare W/o Karan Banjare Aged About 36 Years At- House of Gayatri Chakravarti, Sharda Vihar Colony, Village- Temri, P.S. Mana Camp, Raipur, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Throuhg- P.S. Mana Camp. Raipur, C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate appears through video conferencing For State /Respondent : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/11/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Shuraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested on 20/01/2025 in connection with Crime No. 18/2025, ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.11.27 10:34:45 +0530 2 / 3 registered at Police Station Mana Camp, Raipur, C.G. for the offence punishable under Section 103 (1) of the B.N.S. 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that the applicant in the intervening night of 19-20/01/2025 in the house of Gayatri Chakravarty, Sharda Vihar Colony, District Raipur committed murder of the deceased Sanjay Jangade by assaulting on his head by way of an hammer, whereby the deceased died. The said incident was narrated by one Gopal Dhar Choudhary to the police authorities pursuant to which a Merg No.3/25 under Section 194 of the BNSS and Crime No.18/25 under Section 103(1) of BNS was registered against the applicant. Thereafter after the registration of the FIR, the applicant was taken into custody. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the hammer which has been recovered was examined by the fingerprint expert and no fingerprint of the applicant was found over it. He would next contend that on being examined the spot the footprints of male person were found at the incident. He would next contend that the primary witness Rajendra Patel has stated that he is not aware about the fact that as to who killed the deceased. He would lastly contend that the applicant is a young lady and she is in jail since 20/01/2025, therefore, she may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6. Perusal of the documents would show that blood stains were found in the clothes of the applicant, therefore, it cannot be presumed that nothing 3 / 3 had happened. In order to appreciate the argument this Court would not go into the merits so as to marshal the evidence to usurpt the power of trial Court. Therefore, since the other witnesses are still to be examined, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. However, learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu