Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7684 (CHH)

CHANDU RAM SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/3477/2026 · 2026-04-27

Shri Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3477 of 2026 1 - Chandu Ram Sahu S/o Ram Kishun Sahu Aged About 42 Years R/o. Village Madeli, Chowki Birejhar, P.S. Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) 2 - Dwarika Ram Sahu S/o Ram Kishun Sahu Aged About 52 Years R/o. Village Madeli, Chowki, Birejhar, P.S. Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Chowki Birejhar P.S. Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Syed Imtiaz Ali, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 28/04/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed u/s 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.85/2025 registered at Chowki Birejhar P.S. Kurud, District- Dhamtari (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 191(2), 191(3), 103(1) of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution case, on 16.03.2025, complainant Dhaneshwar Sahu reported that on the previous day i.e. 15.03.2025, he along with his friends Gajendra Sahu, Devendra Sahu and BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.04.28 17:10:57 +0530 2 Dummu Yadav went for a ride on a motorcycle towards Bhathapara Madeli. While at a local shelter (Gauthan), they had a minor verbal spat with co-accused Chetan Sahu, who initially fled. When they headed back to the road, Chetan’s family members (Chandu, Dwarika, Chandrika, Khushbu, and Tarini) intercepted them with sticks, hurling abuses and physically assaulting them. When Gajendra Sahu (deceased) tried to intervene, co-accused Chetan Sahu assaulted him on the head multiple times with a wooden plank, causing him to collapse. Accused Chetan continued to beat him even after he lost consciousness. Deceased Gajendra’s brothers later rushed him to Kurud hospital, but he was referred to Mekahara Hospital in Raipur, where he passed away at approximately 9:00 PM that night. Based on the report of the complainant, an FIR was registered against the accused persons leading to the applicants’ arrested on 17.03.2025. 3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits the main accused in this case is Chetan Sahu who allegedly committed the offence and the applicants have not caused any injury to the deceased. He submits that co-accused Smt. Tarini Sahu has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 02.03.2026 in MCRC No.1816 of 2026. There is no previous criminal record against the applicants. He further submits that out of total 23 witness, only 12 have been examined so far, the applicants are in jail since 17.03.2025 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be 3 concluded at the earliest. Hence, considering all these facts, the applicants may be released on bail. 4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application submits that the complainant has supported the case of prosecution. He submits that sticks have been seized from both the applicants who allegedly played active roles in the commission of offence. Therefore, considering the nature of offence, the applicants do not deserve to be released on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of offence and the material collected and available on record against the applicants, this Court is not inclined to release the applicants on bail. 7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected. 8. However, considering the fact that the applicants are in jail since 17.03.2025, the Trial Court is directed to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 5 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai