Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55792 (CHH)

CHITRSEN SAO v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/9328/2025 · 2025-11-18

Shri Arvind Kumar Verma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:56286 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9328 of 2025 Chitrsen Sao S/o Babulal Sao Aged About 31 Years Village- Tamnar P.S. Tamnar District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Officer-In Charge Police Station- Punjipathara, Distt- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajit Singh, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 19/11/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 109/2024, registered at Police Station Punjripathara, District- Raigarhn (CG) for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. 2 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that,the applicant who is husband of the deceased/ Savita @ Santosh Manjhi had assaulted the deceased with hand and fist and she was lying on the floor. That it has been alleged that the applicant himself informed some person regarding the incident. It has been further alleged that several injuries were caused to the deceased as a result of which, she died. Thereafter the report was lodged and investigation was initiated and the applicant was arrested. 3. It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant has not killed his wife and there is no eye witness and without any basis, the police has registered the offence against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 12.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial will take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that all the evidences are against the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. A perusal of the case reveals that the applicant/accused is charged with an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the murder of Savita Manjhi by 3 hitting her on the head, cheeks and chest with hands, fists, kicks and a wooden rolling pin between 10:00 am on 18.04.2024 and 11:00 am on 19.04.2024 at a rented house in Dhaniram Colony, Punjipathra. The alleged offense is of a very serious nature. A perusal of the case does not reveal prima facie grounds for the applicant/accused's innocence. 7. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature & gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant- Chitrsen Sao involved in Crime No. 109/2024 under Section 302 of IPC at Police Station- Punjipathara, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, is rejected. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the Trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously as soon as possible in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima