1 2026:CGHC:26962 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1357 of 2026 1 - Ramayan Singh Markam S/o Anandi Singh Aged About 43 Years R/o Barampur, Outpost Sarwamangla, P.S. Kusmunda Korba Presently R/o Quarter Number Block I / 102, P.M.G. Colony Mudapar Outpost Manikpur P.S. Kotwali District- Korba (C.G.) 2 - Rajkumari Markam W/o Ramayan Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Barampur Outpost Sarwamangla, P.S. Kusmunda Korba Presently R/o Quarter Number Block- I /102, P.M.G. Colony Mudapar Outpost Manikpur P.S. Kotwali District- Korba (C.G.) ... Appellants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Ajak, Korba District- Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Deepa Singh, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 01/07/2026 1. Father of the victim appeared virtually and recorded objection in granting bail to the appellants. SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SINGH RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.07.02 12:05:57 +0530 2 2. This appeal is filed second time under Section 14-A (2) of the SCST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail to the appellants as they is arrested in connection with crime number 144/2025 registered at police station AJAK, District Korba (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 80(2) R/w 3(5) & 103 R/w 3(5) of BNS and under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. 3. The appeal which was filed for the first time was dismissed on 02.02.2026, passed in CRA No.68/2026. 4. By order dated 21.05.2026 passed by the Trial Court in Special Case (SCST) No.6/2026, the third bail application filed by the appellants was rejected against which the appellants have filed this appeal. 5. In this case there are total 6 accused persons. The prosecution case is that deceased Kajal Bhardwaj died on 17.01.2025 during treatment at District Hospital, Korba after consuming poison. According to the Merg enquiry, she had entered into a love marriage with co-accused Kamlesh Mahant, about one and a half years prior to the incident. It is alleged that after the marriage, her husband, mother-in-law, sisters-in-law, applicants Rajkumari Markam and her husband Ramayan Singh, along with other family members, subjected her to cruelty by taunting and harassing her for not bringing dowry and on the ground that she belonged to a Scheduled Caste. Unable to bear the alleged harassment, the deceased consumed poison and died. Based on above, offence has been registered against the appellants. 6. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that the main accused is Kamlesh. As per the statement of father Narayan Prasad (PW-1) and mother Leela Bai (PW-2) of the deceased, co-accused Kamlesh and the deceased Kajal were living separately before 3 months of the 3 incident. The appellants herein were also living separately from them. At the time of deciding the first bail application/appeal, the charge-sheet had not been filed. The charge-sheet has now been filed. Out of 20 prosecution witnesses cited, 04 prosecution witnesses have been examined till date. The appellants are in jail since 25.11.2025 and the appeal is likely to take some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the appeal may be allowed and the appellants may be released on bail. 7. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient evidence available on record against the appellants, therefore, at this stage, the appellants may not be granted bail. 8. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, detention period of the appellants, statements of parents of the deceased and the fact that the appeal is likely to take some time to be finalized, without further commenting on merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to release the appellants on bail. 10.Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 21.05.2026 passed by the Trial Court is set-aside. 11. It is directed that the appellants shall be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for their appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge -Shubham