1 2026:CGHC:4455 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 569 of 2026 1 - Sajan Agariya S/o Late Maniram Agariya, Aged About 42 Years, R/o - Village Kathrapali, P.S. And Tahsil Gharghoda, District Raigarh (C.G.). 2 - Malikram Chauhan S/o Natthuram Chauhan, Aged About 37 Years, R/o - Village Kathrapali, P.S. And Tahsil Gharghoda, District Raigarh (C.G.). ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge Police Station - Gharghoda District Raigarh (C.G.). ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Advocate. For State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order on Board 27/01/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 228/2025 registered at Police Station Gharghoda, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 49, 238, 3(5) of SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2026.01.27 18:01:48 +0530 2 BNS, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on receiving information from Chandni Rathiya @ Karrihin, the informant Ranjeet Sidar lodged a merg intimation stating that the deceased Natthuram Chauhan was found lying dead near his field with grievous injuries. The informant, along with Tirathram Rathiya and other villagers, went to the field and confirmed the death. A post-mortem was conducted, and a case was registered against unknown persons. During the investigation, it was found that the applicant, Malikram Chauhan, was the son of the deceased and had a land dispute with him. The deceased Natthuram Chauhan had refused to sell a piece of land (Khat No. 149, admeasuring 3.00 acres) in village Kathrapali, which the applicant wanted to sell. Due to this reason, the applicant, along with Sajan Agariya, allegedly conspired to commit the murder of Natthuram Chauhan. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the FIR, as well as the merg intimation report, does not mention the names of the applicants, as there is no connection between the applicants and the incident that occurred. It is argued that there is no eyewitness to the incident, nor have any incriminating articles been seized from the applicants. The 3 applicants have been in jail since 03.09.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude; therefore, they may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application, submitting that applicant No. 2, along with applicant No. 1, committed the murder of his father. An iron axe and blood-stained clothes have been seized from applicant No. 2, Malikram. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the offence, they may not be enlarged on bail, as the trial has also not yet commenced. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering that nothing incriminating material has been seized from applicant No. 1, Sajan Agariya, but there is a seizure of an iron axe and blood-stained clothes from applicant No. 2, and he had a previous dispute with his father regarding the sale of land, and the trial has not yet commenced, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow the bail application of applicant No. 1 (Sajan Agariya). However, I am not inclined to allow the bail application of applicant No. 2 (Malikram Chauhan). 7. Accordingly, the bail application in respect of applicant No. 4 1 (Sajan Agariya) is allowed and in respect of applicant No. 2 (Malikram Chauhan) is rejected. It is directed that applicant No. 1, Sajan Agariya shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The applicant No. 1 is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court in this order shall not affect the trial of the case. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.