1 2026:CGHC:439 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10284 of 2025 1 - Nohar Prasad Dansena S/o Motilal Dansena, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Bade Domarpali, P.S. And Tehsil Kharsiya, District- Raigarh C.G. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Kharsiya, District- Raigarh C.G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For State/Respondent : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 06/01/2026 1. This is the 02nd Bail Application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.265/2025 registered at Police Station -Kharsiya, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 103(1) of BNS. 2. The first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2026.01.06 10:38:44 +0530 2 merits by this Court on 25.08.2025 in MCRC No.6011/2025. 3. The prosecution's case, in short is that the complainant, Sunil Kumar Rathiya, lodged a written report at Police Station Kharsia on 09.05.2025 to the effect that on the morning of 07.05.2025, he had gone to drop his younger brother's wife, Teejmati, to village Kunkuni. At about 8:00-8:30 p.m., Surit Kumar Rathiya alleged that his wife had an illicit relationship with Nohar Prasad Dansena, and thereupon, an altercation took place between Surit Kumar Rathiya and Nohar Prasad Dansena involving abuse and pushing. In the course of the quarrel, Nohar Prasad Danseena, in a fit of anger, kicked Surit Kumar Rathiya in the abdomen, causing him to fall to the ground. He was thereafter taken home where domestic treatment was being provided. On 08.05.2025, at about 7:00-8:00 p.m., when the condition of Surit Kumar Rathiya deteriorated, he was being taken for treatment to the Medical Hospital, Raigarh, but he succumbed on the way. On the basis of said written report, offence has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case, with no connection to the alleged offence. He further submits that the eye-witness, namely Teejmati Rathiya (PW-2), who is wife of the deceased, and her daughter Sandhya Rathiya have been examined and turned hostile. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been in jail since 09.05.2025. Given that the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, the counsel prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 3 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application, submitting that out of 17 witnesses, only 4 have been examined till date, and therefore, at this stage, he may not be enlarged on bail. He has relied on the orders of this Court dated 07.07.2023, passed in MCRC No. 4212/2023 (Madhusudan Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh), and also in MCRC No. 8579/2025 (Roshan Lal Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh) vide order dated 29.10.2025. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and also taking into account that the eye-witness, namely Teejmati Rathiya (PW-2), who is the wife of the deceased, and her daughter Sandhya Rathiya have been examined and turned hostile, the applicant is in jail since 09.05.2025, and out of 17 witnesses only 04 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, therefore, without commenting anything on merits, I find it appropriate to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 4 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.