1 2026:CGHC:7364 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 821 of 2026 Sanjay Agariya S/o Jawahir Agariya Aged About 25 Years R/o Lohartola Jawaharnagar, P.S. - Balrampur, District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station In-Charge, P.S. - Balrampur, District - Balrampur - Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause-title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Ms. Sonia Kuldeep, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 10/02/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this 2nd 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. 22/2025, registered at Police Station – Balrampur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 & 3(5)/34 of BNS. 2. First bail of the applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 14.07.2025 passed in MCRC No.5080/2025. 3. The prosecution story, in short, is that on 17.02.2025, the applicant along with other co-accused is alleged to have strangulated deceased SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.02.11 15:50:01 +0530 2 Deepa Agariya to death. Based on above, offense has been registered against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. The deceased has committed suicide and the applicant has not done anything. It is argued that the prosecution case relies on the memorandum statement of co-accused. The co-accused Smt. Rajkumari Agariya has already been granted bail by this Court. She further submits that the applicant is in jail since 25.02.2025, out of 25 prosecution witnesses only 11 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take some more time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is no change in circumstances since first bail and the death of the deceased who was the wife of the applicant was homicidal in nature, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the second bail of the applicant may also be rejected. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and the fact that there is no change in circumstances since first bail, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 9. However, looking to the detention period of the applicant, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as early as possible. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham