1 2026:CGHC:25335 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5218 of 2026 1 - Neelkanth Sahu S/o Bhuneshwar Sahu Aged About 70 Years R/o- Ward No.- 06, Mohandipat Khursuni, P.S. Gundardehi, District- Balod (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title as taken from CIS) For Applicant(s) : Mr. H. S. Ahluwalia, Advocate For State : Ms. Deepeshwari Mahilwar, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 22/06/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second 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.92/2026, registered at Police Station – Dongargarh, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 238 of BNS, 2023. ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 2. First bail of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 15.04.2026 passed in MCRC No.3213 of 2026. 3. In this case there are total 3 accused persons. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 22.02.2026, the dead body of an unidentified woman aged about 35–40 years was found near Village Bhesrra, District Rajnandgaon, and upon finding injuries caused by blunt force trauma to the head, a case was registered as Crime No. 92/2026 at Police Station Dongargarh under Section 103(1) of the BNS. During investigation, the deceased was identified as Purnima Netam. The prosecution alleges that the main accused, Sunil Netam, who is the husband of the deceased, suspected her character and, owing to such personal suspicion and animosity, committed her murder. The motive attributed by the prosecution is exclusively personal to the said accused. So far as the present applicant is concerned, no motive, enmity, dispute, or grievance against the deceased has been alleged at any stage of the investigation. The only allegation against the applicant is that, on the instructions of the main accused, he burnt certain clothes allegedly connected with the incident, which, according to the prosecution, constitutes destruction of evidence punishable under Section 238 of the BNS. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the principal allegation of murder is against co-accused Sunil Netam, the husband of the deceased, who is alleged to have 3 committed the offence due to personal suspicion regarding the character of the deceased. No motive or direct role in the alleged murder has been attributed to the present applicant. The only allegation against him is that he allegedly burnt certain clothes at the instance of the main accused, thereby attracting the offence under Section 238 of the BNS. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in custody since 24.02.2026, the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed. Considering the period of incarceration and the fact that the trial is likely to take time as 17 witnesses have been cited by the prosecution, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that as per the FSL report, no blood stains were detected. He further contended that certain burnt clothes were seized from the possession of the applicant, which prima facie indicates his involvement in causing disappearance of evidence after the commission of the offence, therefore, this bail applicant deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and further taking into considering the nature of allegations, the absence of any material showing his direct participation in the commission of murder, the only allegation against the applicant is that, after the 4 incident, he allegedly burnt certain clothes belonging to the main accused, which, according to the prosecution, amounts to causing disappearance of evidence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to allow the application. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed. 9. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on 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 his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Saxena