1 2026:CGHC:10485 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1671 of 2026 Sanju Singh S/o Shri Balisingh Marpachi, aged about 26 years, R/o Village- Kundeli, Thana- Jaitpur, District- Sehdol (Madhya Pradesh), present address- Yasnavi Factory, Village- Acholi, Thana- Urla, Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer, Thana- Urla, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Mahesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, G.A. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 28/02/2026 1. The accused/applicant has moved this Third bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 360/2023 registered at police station Urla, District Raipur, (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201/34of IPC. Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 2. Prosecution case in brief is that the applicant along with the co- accused Bali Singh and Ramlal Singh have committed murder of the deceased on the ground that he had some illicit relation with wife and daughter of the co-accused and in order to destroy the evidence, he threw the dead body in the mud. Thereafter, on the basis of the report of the complainant an offence under Sections 302 and 201/34 of IPC was registered and the investigation was started. Thereafter, on the basis of the memorandum of the applicant, seizure was made and the applicant was taken into custody. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the third bail application of the applicant Sanju Singh, the first bail application of the applicant vide order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 1160 of 2024 was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh application for examination of material witnesses by this Court. The second bail application of the applicant vide order dated 11.03.2025 passed by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 561 of 2025 was dismissed on merits. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 12.09.2023 and the trial is likely to take some time as out of 18 witnesses only 12 witnesses have been examined and the entire case is based on extra judicial confession before Udham Singh and Krishna Bihari Mishra who have turned hostile. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail applications submitted by the applicant and 3 contended that at this stage, evaluating the statement of the witnesses would amount to usurping the power of the trial Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the prolonged incarceration of the applicant since 12.09.2023, and taking into account that he has no prior criminal antecedents, it is evident that the prosecution case rests primarily on circumstantial evidence, including an alleged extra-judicial confession made before Udham Singh and Krishna Bihari Mishra. Furthermore, the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future. 7. In view of the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the attributed role of the present applicant and material witnesses have been examined and looking to the evidence and he is in jail since 12.09.2023, this Court is of the considered opinion that he has made out a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, I am inclined to release the applicant on regular bail and his bail application is hereby allowed. 8. Let the Applicant– Sanju Singh , involved in Crime No. 360/2023 registered at Police of Police Station – Urla, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under aforesaid sections be released on bail on his furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (i) 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) 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. (iv) 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 5 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- s Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE U.K. Raju