1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2608 of 2026 Brijesh Ojha @ Maanu S/o Brijmohan Ojha Aged About 26 Years R/o -In Front Of Vihar Garden Yadunandan Nagar, P.S.Sirgitti, District Bilapur (C.G.) Presently Residing At Sahupara Fafadih P.S. Ganj,raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. -Tikrapara, District -Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Mr. RL Rajak, Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 01/04/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 48/2025, registered at Police Station – Tikrapara, District- Raipur (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 103 of BNS. 2. As per prosecution story, on 14.01.2025, the applicant took Tamanna Tandi (now deceased) in a dezire car and committed her murder by strangulation. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 28.01.2025. 2 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the FIR has been registered against unknown person. The said car has not been seized from the applicant and it was also not registered in his name. The applicant is in jail since 28.01.2025, out of 17 prosecution witnesses, 4 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that the said car has been seized from the applicant and there was an rental agreement between the owner and the applicant, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 8. However, looking to the detention period of the applicant, the concerned Trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as early as possible preferably within a period of 5 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham