Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4088 (CHH)

MAHENDRA DIWAKAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/2576/2026 · 2026-04-05

Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:15666 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.2576 of 2026 Mahendra Diwakar S/o Ramprasad Diwakar Aged About 24 Years R/okatkidabri, Dhourabhantha, Thana Hardibazar District Korba (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through -P.S. -Hardibazar,district Korba - (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant: Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 06.04.2026 1. This is the 1st bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the Applicant, who has been SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.04.07 12:47:40 +0530 2 arrested in connection with Crime No.207/2024 registered at Police Station Hardibazar, District Korba for the offence under Section 103(1) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.08.2024 at about 3:00 PM, the Applicant, who is the husband of the deceased namely Mamta Diwakar, informed the police about the death of his wife, who was found lying dead at their residence. Thereafter, the police initiated inquiry, registered a merg intimation and subsequently, on 28.08.2024, lodged an FIR for the offence under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S. against the present Applicant. Hence, this Application. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question for which, he is languishing in jail since 28.08.2024. He further submits that out of 19 witnesses, 12 have been examined and the trial is not likely to conclude in the near future, therefore, the Applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the Non-Applicant/State opposed the bail application and submitted that there is sufficient material against the Applicant, including his memorandum as well as an extra-judicial confession made before one Maheshwari Mahilange, therefore, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 3 5. Having considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties, the facts and circumstances of the case, the grievous nature of the offence and the extra-judicial confession made before Maheshwari Mahilange, without further commenting on the merits of the case, this Court does not find it appropriate to grant bail to the Applicant. 6. Accordingly, the application is rejected. However, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and make all endeavour to conclude the same within a period of 4 months from the receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Priya