1 2026:CGHC:1543 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 307 of 2026 Sahebdas Kurre S/o Purandas Kurre Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Prabhatola, Chounki Pondi, Thana Bodla, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Thana Bodla, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr.Sanjay Gupta, Advocate assisted by Mr. Ranjan Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Kishan Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Suyash Dhar Badgaiya, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 12.01.2026 1. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 89/2025 registered at Police Station – Thana Bodla (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 103(1) and 3(5) of BNS. First bail application of the present applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 19.08.2025 in MCRC No. 6532 of 2025. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that, co-accused Sahebdas has lodged morgue before the concerned Police Station on 02.06.2023 about the ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.01.12 17:16:46 +0530 2 death of Agamdas stating that when he returned back from agricultural field, he found the deceased Agamdas lying dead on cot and the blood was oozing out. Based on the memorandum the police enquired the morgue report and thereafter, based on the memorandum statement of Sahebdas, he was arrested and thereafter his wife/present applicant Saroj Bai was also arrested on 11.06.2025. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, he has not committed offence as alleged. He further submits that there is no connecting evidences against the applicant. He was arrested only on the basis of memorandum statement recorded by Police. The memorandum witnesses Prakash Yadav and Kamlesh Chauhan are examined as PW-3 and PW-5, they are not supporting the case of prosecution. Applicant is in jail since 11.06.2025, hence he may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State raises an objection and would submit that applicant and deceased being uncle and nephew residing in the same house. He submits that dead body of deceased was found within the premises of house of applicant. From the possession of applicant axe was seized and in memorandum statement he admitted his guilt. 5. At this stage, counsel for the applicant submits that from the spot map and the body panchnama it is appearing that the body was lying in front of the house of applicant and not inside. 6. Upon putting specific query to learned counsel for State as to whether the blood is found on the axe stated to be seized from the applicant and 3 FSL is available in the case diary, he submits that there is no such mention in the seizure memo nor FSL report is available. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 8. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 9. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE