Dismissed¶23

Krishna Kumar Patre v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC18 Jan 2026MCRC/154/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; MCRC 154 of 2026; Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal; 19/01/2026; bail rejected; Section 483 BNSS 2023 bail application; BNS 2023 Sections 103(1) murder, 238, 61(2), 3(5); Crime No. 37/2025 PS Gariyaband; deceased Samari Bai; half-burnt body; strangulation; circumstantial evidence; 4 of 29 witnesses examined; 7 prior criminal cases; trial expedited directive.

What did the court decide?

No bail relief; bail application rejected. Trial Court directed to expedite the trial and conclude it as early as possible in view of the detention period. ¶23

Krishna Kumar Patre Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHUBHAM SINGH SINGH RAGHUVANSHI RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.01.19 17:54:26 +0530

¶3

2026:CGHC:3047

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCRC No. 154 of 2026

¶7

Krishna Kumar Patre S/o Late Sewa Ram Patre Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Hathbay, Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Applicant

¶9

versus

¶10

State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband C.G.

¶11

... Respondent For Applicant : Mohammad Afroz Athar, Adv. For Respondent/State : Ms. Laxmeen Kashyap, P.L.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶13

Order On Board

¶14

19/01/2026

¶15

The applicant has preferred this 1^st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 37/2025, registered at Police Station – Gariyaband, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 103 (1), 238, 61(2), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

¶16

The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 19.03.2025, information was received about an unidentified half burnt body found in Village Hathbay. The deceased was later identified as Samari Bai. It was revealed that

¶17

¶18

the deceased died due to strangulation. The applicant is alleged to have murdered the deceased. Based on this, an offence has been registered, and the applicant was arrested on 23.03.2025.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been implicated only on the basis of circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence available on record against the applicant. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 23.03.2025, out of 29 prosecution witnesses, 4 have been examined and the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶20

On the other hand, the State's counsel opposes the bail application, submitting that the applicant has a history of 7 criminal cases.

¶21

I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, evidence collected by the prosecution, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, the bail application is rejected . However, looking to the detention period of the applicant, the concerned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to ensure that the trial is concluded as early as possible.

¶24

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶25

Shubham

Krishna Kumar Patre v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar Patre v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Fagni Bai Vs Sitara Begum

Abc Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Rambai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Xyz Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dinesh Dahariya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Uttam Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh