1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1657 of 2025 1 - Shankar Yadav S/o Shri Budhu Ram Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Khuntapani, Post- Kokiya Tahsil- Patthalgaon, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Sariya, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Kaushal Yadav, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. For Objector : Mr. Basant Dewangan, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 04.04.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for the grant of regular bail pertaining to Crime No.146/2022 registered at Police Station Sariya, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 1.8.2022, two dead bodies were found floating in Mahanadi river in between Pillar No.34-35 near Nadigaon, Surajgarh, District Raigarh and said information was given by Vishwajeet Manjhi to the police. The police recovered dead bodies and SMT NIRMALA RAO 2 lodged merg report. During merg inquiry, dead bodies were got identified by the family members of deceased Shukru Ram Yadav and Manvati Yadav. During investigation, statement of younger son of the deceased, who was juvenile, was recorded, in which, he revealed that since his elder brother Khuleshwar was a sick person, therefore, tantrik Chatra Mohan Yadav told them that since his parents practice witchcraft, his elder brother remains ill. It is further alleged that said tantrik suggested to the juvenile that if they kill his parents Shukru Ram Yadav and Manvati Yadav, then his elder brother Khuleshwar would get well. Thereafter said juvenile and his jeeja Narsingh Yadav hatched conspiracy along with other accused persons and thereafter on 30.7.2022 all the accused persons took Shukru Ram Yadav and Manvati Yadav, who were residing in Raigarh at that time, in the vehicle on the pretext that their elder son Khuleshwar is not well and on the way they strangled both of them to death. FIR was lodged by the police and after usual investigation, charge sheet has been filed against present applicant and other 5 accused persons for the offence under Section 302, 201, 120B, 34 IPC. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is resident of village Maheshpur, Post Kadro, PS Bagabhar, Patthalgaon Distt. Jashpur. He sat in the jeep of Narsingh Yadav, on being told by him to go to other village. The applicant was not aware about said conspiracy of killing of Shukru Ram Yadav and Manvati Yadav. He further submits that there is no evidence against present applicant, except memorandum statement of Narsingh Yadav and the juvenile. Nothing has been seized from the applicant and there is no motive for the applicant to kill the deceased persons. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 08.8.2022 and out of 29 witnesses, till date only 06 witnesses have been examined and conclusion of the trial is likely to take long time, hence, he may be granted bail. 3 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that the applicant has played active role in the conspiracy of killing Shukru Ram Yadav and Manvati Yadav and even as per the memorandum statement of Narsingh Yadav and the juvenile, this applicant has actively participated in the commission of murder of both deceased, hence, his bail application may be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the case diary and material available on record. 6. Perusal of the case diary shows that the main accused are said to be the juvenile, who is younger son of the deceased persons, his jeeja Narsingh Yadav and tantrik Chatramohan Yadav. Present applicant has been implicated in the present case only on the basis of memorandum statement of the juvenile and his jeeja Narsingh Yadav. Nothing has been seized from present applicant to connect him with crime in question. 7. Having considered the aforesaid facts and totality of the facts and further considering that the applicant is in jail since 08.8.2022 and conclusion of trial will take considerable time, I feel inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (i) He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial; (iii) He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till the disposal of the trial; and, 4 (iv) He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for the grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observation made in the course of this order. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Nimmi