1 2026:CGHC:7993 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1463 of 2026 Nisha Shriwas D/o Janikram Shriwas Aged About 50 Years R/o Dharampura, Police Station Mana, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station, City Kotwali, Balodabazar District Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mrs. Diksha Gauraha, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 13.02.2026 1. Applicant has filed this Second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 865/2024 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Baloda-Bazar (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 61(2), 103(1), 238 of BNS, 2023. First bail application of the present applicant was withdrawn vide order dated 08.10.2025 in MCRC No. 7941 of 2025. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that, on 19.11.2024 a dead body was seen by one Vinod Bhardwaj, who informed this to concerned Police ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.02.13 19:20:26 +0530 2 Station. Based upon which, Police reached on spot and, thereafter registered the crime against unknown persons. During investigation, applicant was also arrested on 20.11.2024. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, she has not committed offence as alleged. He further submits that after withdrawal of first bail application, material witness so far as it relates to facts of the case has been examined i.e. the witnesses to memorandum statement and seizure witness. He submits that there is no direct evidence in this case, however, applicant is arrested based on the memorandum statement and further prosecution has made an attempt to implicate the applicant based on circumstantial evidence. Applicant is in jail since 20.11.2024 and out of total 28 witnesses only 12 have been examined till date. Trial may take some time, hence she may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and submits that Police seized Rs. 4.5 Lacs cash from possession of applicant and also two sim card. From one of the sim, applicant gave call to the main accused namely Kuldeep just day before the incident and on the day of incident which is also connecting piece of evidence against the applicant. However, upon asking learned counsel for the State about evidence with regard to seizure of mobile phone or sim card from possession of applicant she submits that seizure witnesses who are examined before the Court had not made any specific statement in this regard, however, that is only forming part of the challan. She further submits that seizure 3 witnesses made statement that Police seized 4.5 Lac from the house of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, considering the period of detention and submission of counsel for applicant that the material independent witness have been examined before the trial court, out of 28 witnesses only 12 witness have been examined till date, trial is likely to take time for its conclusion, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) 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. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (c) 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 4 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. (d) 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 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) alfiza JUDGE