Jaideep Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

Jaideep Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

1

Digitally signed by BHOLA BHOLANATH NATH KHATAI KHATAI Date:2026.02.19 17:35:51 +0530

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

MCRC No. 1211 of 2026

Jaideep Sahu S/o Ramesh Sahu Aged About 24 Years R/o Rampur, Choraha, Ward No. 17, Kumhari, District Durg C.G.

versus

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kumhari, District Durg C.G.

... Respondent

For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Sunita Manikpuri, Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board

18.02.2026

1. This is the first bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.53/2025 registered at Police Station Kumhari, District Durg (CG) for offence punishable under Section 103 of BNS.

2. As per the prosecution case, on 17.04.2025 at around 11:30 p.m., the appellant assaulted Bhagwat Markande (deceased)

2

with a sharp knife on his neck, hand, back and other parts of the body, causing grievous injuries to him and resulting in his death. Subsequently, on report being lodged in this regard, the applicant was arrested on 19.04.2025.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of circumstantial evidence. He submits that no panchnama was prepared regarding the CCTV footage. The deceased’s wife Tirthin and son Sanjeev Kumar have not confirmed seeing the accused in the CCTV footage. The remaining witnesses examined till date have also not supported the case of prosecution and turned hostile. He further submits that out of total 20 prosecution witnesses, only 8 have been examined so far, the applicant is in jail since 19.04.2025 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest. Therefore, considering all these facts, the applicant may be released on bail.

4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application submits that the deceased’s son has specifically stated that the applicant is seen in the CCTV footage running from the place of occurrence toward his home at night, armed with a knife and the blood stained knife has been seized. She further submits that there is sufficient material on record against the applicant and, considering the gravity of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

3

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 applicant, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected .

8. However, considering it to be an exceptional case as the applicant is in jail since 19.04.2025 and there are total 20 witnesses in this case out of which only 8 witnesses have been examined so far, the Trial Court is directed to ensure that the trial is concluded as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information.

Sd/-

( Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE

Khatai