1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 486 of 2026 1 - Dulyans Gajbhiye S/o Bhakt Gajbhiye Aged About 21 Years R/o Fadarfod, P.S. Devri, Distt. Balod At Present R/o Near Satnam Bhawan, Village Umda, In Rent House Tuman Lal Gaikwad, P.S. Old Bhilai, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Mohani Lanjewar W/o Rocky Lanjewar Aged About 35 Years R/o Opposite Post Office, Jalebi Chowk, Chhawani, P.S. Chhawani, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Bhilai 3, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh (As Per Fir) ... Respondent For Applicants : Mr. Sudhanshu Ku. Singh, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Aman Tamboli, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 30/01/2026 1. The applicants have preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with crime No.133/2025, 2 registered at Police Station – Bhilai-3, District- Durg (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238(A), 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per prosecution, the complainant, Manoj Dahariya, lodged a report on 06.04.2025 stating that on the same day at around 6:50 am, it was discovered that an unknown male body was burning in a field on the right side of the road leading from Pathrra to Umda. Upon reaching the spot with Gajraj Dahariya and others, it was found that an unknown male, aged around 25-30 years, was burning. The body was sent to Supela Mortuary for safekeeping under the supervision of the Scientific Officer. Information was circulated on various WhatsApp groups to identify the deceased. Based on this, on 07.06.2025, Sonali Meshram and Kranti Lanjevar identified the deceased as their brother, Rocky Lanjevar, based on the face and a tattoo on his right arm. Further case of the prosecution is that applicant No.1 Dulyans is son-in-law of deceased Rocky and Applicant No.2 Mohini is wife of the deceased. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that the juvenile accused has already been granted bail. There is no evidence available on record against Applicant no.2 and the applicants have been implicated only on the basis of circumstantial evidence. The deceased have four criminal antecedents. He further submits that the juvenile accused who is daughter of the deceased has lodged the report against deceased Rocky on the allegation of rape and POCSO. On the said report, accused was arrested and thereafter was released on bail. On 28.06.2024, at the house where applicant no.2 was living with her family, the deceased set fire to the house. Thereafter, on the date of incident i.e. on 05.04.2025, Rocky grab the juvenile/minor daughter with intention to outrage her modesty. He further submits that the applicants are in jail since 07.04.2025, out of 27 prosecution witnesses only 12 have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicants may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is a seizure of iron rod from Applicant No.1 and blood stained clothes from Applicant No.2., the FSL 3 report is awaited, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicants 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, evidence collected by the prosecution and the detention period of applicant No.2, without further commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release applicant No.2 Mohani Lanjewar on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed with regard to Applicant No.2 only. 8. It is directed that applicant No.2 shall be released on bail on her executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for her appearance before the said Court as and when directed. 9. The bail application with regard to Applicant No.1 Dulyans Gajbhiye is hereby rejected. 10. However, considering the fact that Applicant No.1 is in jail since 07.04.2025, the 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 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham