1 CGHC010339782026 2026:CGHC:40318 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8562 of 2026 Seema Sahu W/o Lalji Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Ramgarh, P. S. City Cotwali, Mungeli, District Mungeli, C. G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, Mungeli, District Mungeli, C. G. ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Indrapreet Kaur Chhabra, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Ramnarayan Sahu, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 15.09.2026 1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as she has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 562/2022 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali Mungeli, District- Mungeli (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 302, 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.09.16 15:50:46 +0530 2 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that on 02.10.2022 at about 8:00 pm, when deceased Jitendra Sahu came to vegetable market and was about to stand his motor-cycle, applicant and Laalji Sahu came there, poured petrol over him and set Jitendra Sahu on fire and thereafter, gave blow by sickle on his stomach. Deceased suffered injury on his abdomen. He was taken to hospital and during treatment, he died. Incident was reported to the concerned police station, based upon which aforementioned crime was registered and applicant along with other co-accused was arrested on 03.10.2022. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, she has not committed any offence as alleged. She further submits that the case is registered against the applicant only on the basis of statement of eye-witnesses namely Kumari Yadav and Dharmendra Kurre. During course of trial both of them turned hostile and had not supported the case of prosecution. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for applicant and would submit that there are specific allegation of assault by means of sickle against the applicant. He also submits that Kumari Yadav one of the eye witness stood with her statement recorded by the Police with regard to assault of deceased by this applicant by means of sickle, in her evidence before Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 6. Considering the submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties as also the documents enclosed along with this bail application, I 3 do not find present to be a fit case to allow the application, accordingly, application is dismissed. 7. However considering the period of detention learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the proceedings at the earliest. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE