1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9282 of 2025 1 - Suresh Kumar S/o Doman Aged About 53 Years R/o Village- Kawarabandh, Police Station- Salekasa (Wrongly Mentioned As Salesasa), District- Gondiya (Maharastra) ... applicant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Station House Officer, Police Station- Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For applicant (s) : Mr. D. S. Shrimali, Advocate along with Mr. M.M. Garg, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Dubey, Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on board 18.11.2025. 1. This is the fourth bail application of the applicant. The first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to repeat the same after examination of two witnesses i.e. Pappu @ Heera Lal and Pukhraj vide order dated 27.11.2024 passed in MCRC No.5367/2024. The second bail application filed by the applicant vide MCRC No. 9100/2024 SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.11.19 17:37:02 +0530 2 and at that time, the said two witnesses Pappu @ Heera Lal and Pukhraj were not examined and therefore, the second bail application of the applicant was dismissed on 14.01.2025. Thereafter, the third bail application of the applicant was filed vide MCRC No. 7274/2025 and on that time, these two witnesses Pappu @ Heera Lal and Pukhraj have been examined, however, the third bail application was also dismissed vide order dated 16.09.2025 by saying that the evidence of these two witnesses Pappu @ Heera Lal and Pukhraj are to be considered by the learned trial Court during the trial as the allegation against the applicant is that, he is in conspiracy with the other accused persons and committed murder of the deceased by strangulation and crushed him by Scorpio vehicle and the said Scorpio vehicle has been seized from co-accused Hemant and considering the gravity of the offence, the third bail application of the applicant has been dismissed. 2. The applicant who is in jail since 13.05.2024 in connection with Crime No. 220/2024, registered at P.S. Khairagarh, Dist- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan- Gandai for the offence under Section 302, 120B and 34 of IPC is claiming regular bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that except the memorandum statement of the applicant, there is no other evidence again him in the entire charge-sheet and if the entire charge-sheet is admitted as it is, there would be no prima facie offence made out against the applicant yet he is in jail since 13.05.2024. He would also submit that these two witnesses Pappu @ Heera Lal and Pukhraj before whom the applicant is said to have given his memorandum statement, have been turned hostile during the trial and not supported the prosecution case. Only 7 witnesses 3 have been examined till date and final adjudication of the case will take its own time and therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes and has submitted that earlier, three bail applications of the applicant has been dismissed. On 16.09.2025, the third bail application of the applicant is dismissed. On that day, these two witnesses Pappu @ Heera Lal and Pukhraj have already been examined and considering the gravity of the offence and the allegation against the applicant that he conspired with other accused persons, his third bail application was dismissed. The trial is in progress and there is no change in circumstances, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the bail applications and gone through the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the fact that on 16.09.2025 when the third bail application of the applicant has been dismissed, Pappu @ Heera Lal and Pukhraj have already been examined and thereafter, the third bail application of the applicant has been dismissed, considering the gravity of offence as well as the allegation of conspiracy against him with other co-accused persons, the trial is also in progress and 7 witnesses have been examined, the appreciation of the deposition of the witnesses are to be done by the learned trial court during the trial, the nature of allegation and material collected during the investigation and also in view of the fact that earlier 03 bail applications of the applicant have been dismissed, I am not inclined to admit the fourth bail of the applicant as there is no change in circumstances. 4 7. Consequently, the fourth bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail is hereby rejected. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Sagrika