1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2731 of 2026 1 - Raja Babu Markam S/o Kariya Aged About 22 Years Present R/o- Bhatapara Ward No. 2, Arjunda, District- Balod (C.G.) --- Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, Police Station Arjunda, District Balod (C.G.) --- Respondent MCRC No. 2734 of 2026 1 - Rohit Markaaam S/o Hemsingh Markaam Aged About 23 Years Present R/o Near Tehsil Office Arjunda District- Balod (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- SHO Police Station Arjunda- District- Balod (C.G.) --- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Adv. in both the matters For Respondent/State : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 10/04/2026 1. Since both the MCRCs arise out of the same Crime No. 212/2024, they are being heard and disposed of by this common order. HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.04.10 16:57:43 +0530 2 2. The applicants have preferred these First bail applications under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act, 2023 for grant of regular bail as they are arrested in connection with Crime No.212/2024, registered at Police Station – Arjunda, District- Balod (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 126(2), 3(5) of BNS. 3. As per the prosecution’s case, it is alleged that on 22.11.2024, the present applicants along with one juvenile co-accused, intentionally caused the death of the deceased Dukhuram by assaulting him with their hands and strangulating him with a belt. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He further submits that there is a total of 21 listed witnesses in this case, out of which 10 witnesses have been examined. He also submits that there is no direct evidence against the present applicants, and they have been implicated on the basis of circumstantial evidence. The FSL report of the seized articles has not been received. The applicants are in jail since 24.11.2024, and the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, the applicants may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient material against the present applicants. Kailasha Bai, the wife of the deceased, supported the case of the prosecution and stated that there was a dispute between her husband and the applicants just before the incident. There is a seizure of an alleged weapon of offence i.e. a belt, a motorcycle and clothes from the applicant Raja Babu and clothes from the applicant Rohit Markam. The applicants along with one juvenile co- accused, committed a heinous offence of murder; therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, at this stage, the applicants may not be released on bail. 3 6. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the material available on record against the applicants and also looking to the gravity of the offence, at this stage, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the bail applications filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, are rejected. 8. However, considering the fact that the applicants are in jail since 24.11.2024 and only 10 witnesses out of 21 witnesses have been examined till date, the concerned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible. 9. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge H.L. Sahu