1 2025:CGHC:58808 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9862 of 2025 1 - Hemraj Patel S/o Rajaram Patel Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Sadgavon (Correct Name Of Village Sidguwa) P.S. Bahariya, District Sagar (M.P.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, P.S. Saragaon, Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ---Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Aishwarya Kumar Dubey, Advocate For-Non-applicant : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Dy. G.A. For Objector : Mr. Vikas Pandey, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 04/12/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with Crime No. 101/2025, registered at Police Station Saragaon, Jangir Champa, Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 238 of BNS 2023. 2. Brief facts of the case are that On 17.07.2025, the complainant, Pushpendra Pandey, appeared at Police Station Saragaon and lodged a report stating that he is a resident of Village Beersinghpur, District 2 Umaria, Madhya Pradesh. His father, Prem Lal Pandey, used to work as a petty contractor. He himself was residing on rent along with Rahul Thakur alias Bhishma Narayan in the newly constructed house of Dileram Gabel situated at Village Kamrid. On 17.07.2025, he received information from Kirtan Gabel, son of the house owner, that his father, Prem Lal Pandey, was found hanging from the staircase of their under-construction house and had died. Upon receiving this message, he reached the spot along with his uncles, Nagendra Pandey and Virendra Pandey, and found that his father was hanging from the roof staircase with a nylon rope tied around his neck and was already dead. At the scene of occurrence, bloodstains were found on the bed sheet and surrounding area, and there were visible injuries, abrasions and blood marks on the face, cheeks, right elbow, right ankle and foot of his father. Suspecting that his father had been murdered, he questioned Rahul Thakur alias Bhishma Narayan, resident of Ragoli, District Sagar (M.P.), and the applicant/accused Hemraj Patel, resident of Tilakganj, District Sagar (M.P.), who were present near the spot at the relevant time. During inquiry made by him and his uncles, the accused persons disclosed that the deceased, after consuming liquor, used to abuse them regularly, which enraged them. Out of anger, both accused persons assaulted the deceased, strangulated him with a nylon rope, killed him, and thereafter hung him to make it appear as a case of suicide. In pursuance of this plan, on 16.07.2025 at about 11:00 PM, they beat him and strangulated him with a nylon rope until he died, and then hung him. On the basis of above complaint,c case was registered. The applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been 3 falsely implicated in the present case and no offence, much less the one alleged, is made out against him. It is argued that the entire prosecution story rests upon a highly doubtful version narrated by the complainant, which itself is based on suspicion and alleged extra-judicial confession said to have been made before the complainant and his relatives— statements which are inherently weak and inadmissible in law. Learned counsel contends that no independent witness from the locality has supported the alleged disclosure or presence of the applicant at the spot. 4. It is further submitted that there is no direct evidence to show that the applicant assaulted or caused the death of the deceased. The prosecution has failed to collect any cogent material establishing the applicant’s involvement in the alleged act of strangulation or in hanging the deceased. The memorandum statement recorded under Section 27 of the Evidence Act is alleged to be fabricated and does not lead to discovery of any incriminating article. The nylon rope recovered is a common household item, and its mere seizure cannot be attributed to the applicant. The entire case is based on conjecture and surmises, and the applicant deserves the benefit of bail. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application of the applicant. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Having considered the totality of the material collected during investigation, this Court finds that the nature of allegations against the applicant is grave and serious. The prosecution case, supported by the complainant’s report, the circumstances at the place of occurrence, 4 visible injuries on the body of the deceased, and the memorandum statements of the accused, prima facie indicates a deliberate act of assault, strangulation and subsequent hanging of the deceased to give the incident the colour of suicide. The manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed, coupled with the presence of the applicant and co-accused at the spot and the recovery of incriminating material pursuant to their statements, creates strong prima facie evidence of their involvement. At this stage, there is no material to discredit the prosecution version or to hold that the accusations are unfounded. Considering the severity of the offence, this Court is of the opinion that no case is made out for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti