1 2026:CGHC:8279 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1614 of 2026  Satya Prakash Sahu S/o Bhai Ram Sahu Aged About 35 Years R/o Ram Nagar, Ward No. 26, Kawardha, Police Station Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus  State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ---Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Abhipreet Bajpai, Advocate. For-Non-applicant : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, GA. Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Vema, Judge Order on Board 16/02/2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 80/2017 registered at Police Station Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of Indian Penal Code. 2 2. First bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court on 12.11.2025 in MCRC No.9050/2025. 3. The allegation against the present applicant as per the prosecution case is that, the informant Baldau Chandravanshi lodged a report at Police Station Kawardha stating that he was informed by his neighbors over the phone that Dr. Ganesh Kumar Suryavanshi and his wife Dr. Usha Suryavanshi were lying dead in the courtyard of their residential house. Upon receiving the information, the informant climbed onto the roof of Maharaj's house, adjacent to Dr. Suryavanshi's residence, and saw the doctor couple lying dead in the courtyard of their house with blood oozing from their heads. Based on this information, Marg No. 0/2017 was registered and the matter was taken up for marg enquiry. The post-mortem of the deceased persons bodies was conducted and upon returning to Police Station Kawardha, Marg Nos. 21/2017 and 22/2017 were registered. Upon finding that the death of the deceased Dr. Ganesh Kumar Suryavanshi and the deceased Dr. Usha Suryavanshi was caused by severe injuries inflicted on their heads with a heavy and solid object by an unknown person, First Information Report bearing Crime No. 80/2017 was registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against unknown person and the case was taken up for investigation. During the investigation of the case, statements of the deceased persons' family members, the woman who 3 previously worked at the incident site, and the suspect Satya Prakash were recorded. Based on these, the former domestic help of the doctor couple, suspect Satyaprakash, was presented to the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Raipur (Narco Section), where polygraph and brain mapping tests were conducted. Based on the aforesaid report, technical evidence, the medical officer's opinion and the memorandum statement recorded during the accused's interrogation, it was established that the accused used to work as a domestic help and driver at the deceased persons' house. Dr. Ganesh Kumar Suryavanshi had borrowed ₹1,50,000 from the accused, and later borrowed an additional ₹30,000 from his cousin Ayodhya Sahu and gave it to the accused, which was not repaid. On the day of the incident, the accused went to Dr. Suryavanshi's house to demand his money, where he saw the couple arguing with each other. During the dispute, Dr. Ganesh Kumar Suryavanshi struck his wife Dr. Usha Suryavanshi on the head with a stone, causing her death. Fearing that he would be implicated along with Dr. Ganesh Kumar and that his money would be lost, the accused, with the intent to kill Dr. Sahab, pushed him hard, causing him to fall, and then struck Dr. Sahab on the head with the stone, killing him. To conceal the evidence of the murder, the accused admitted to dragging the bodies of the deceased to the backyard courtyard and placing them side by side, one on top of the other. The 4 motorcycle used in the incident was seized from the appellant/accused and he was arrested on 05.07.2025 in the alleged offence/crime. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this second bail application has been filed on account of a change in circumstances. Out of 40 prosecution witnesses, 13 witnesses have already been examined before the learned trial Court and some of them have not completely supported the case of the prosecution. Hence, looking to the material changes in circumstances and period of detention of the applicant, ie, since 05.07.2025, he may be released on bail. 5. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of applicant. 6. Heard learned counsel for parties. 7. Perusal of grounds does not reflect that any new ground has been pleaded in bail application, hence, I do not find any change in circumstances to admit this second bail application. 8. Accordingly, second bail application is dismissed. However, looking to the detention period of the applicant, concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial, expeditiously, as soon as possible, if there is no any legal impediment. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J.