Dismissed¶¶24

Raju Saxena v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 May 2026MCRC/3126/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur — MCRC No. 3126 of 2026, order dated 05/05/2026 by Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal (marked NAFR). Regular bail under S.483 BNSS 2023 rejected in a murder/destruction-of-evidence case (Ss.302/34, 201/34, 435/34, 120-B IPC; Crime No.177/2022, P.S. Kapu, Raigarh; deceased Salik Ram Kujur; body allegedly burnt in car CG-13-UC-7947). Accused in jail since 31.12.2022; trial slow (2/35 witnesses examined as on 23.04.2026). Trial Court directed to conclude trial preferably within 5 months. Co-accused Boat Sai Chouhan's bail earlier rejected in MCRC No.1190/2026 (16.02.2026).

What did the court decide?

No relief to the applicant; regular bail refused. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude it preferably within 5 months, with both parties directed to support early disposal. ¶¶24

Raju Saxena Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, arrested in Crime No. 177/2022 of P.S. Kapu, District Raigarh, for offences punishable under Sections 302/34, 201/34, 435/34, 120-B IPC and in custody since 31.12.2022, is entitled to be released on regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶¶15

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the material available on record against the applicant and the gravity of the offence, and without commenting on the merits, the Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage; the bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 is rejected.

¶¶24

Ratio / Principle

Since the applicant is in jail since 31.12.2022 and only 2 of 35 witnesses have been examined, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and ensure its conclusion as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 5 months from receipt of the copy of the order; both parties are directed to support early disposal of the trial.

¶¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

First regular bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 by Raju Saxena, arrested in Crime No. 177/2022, P.S. Kapu, District Raigarh (C.G.), for offences punishable under Sections 302/34, 201/34, 435/34, 120-B IPC, arising from the alleged killing of Salik Ram Kujur between 28.12.2022 and 29.12.2022 near the Kachcha road bridge from village Dhanpuri to Indakalo, with alleged destruction of evidence by burning the dead body in his car bearing registration No. CG-13-UC-7947. Applicant in custody since 31.12.2022; only 2 of 35 listed witnesses examined as on 23.04.2026. State opposed bail, citing seizure of a motorcycle from the applicant and rejection of co-accused Boat Sai Chouhan's bail on merit in MCRC No. 1190/2026 on 16.02.2026. Court, without commenting on merits and considering the material on record and the gravity of the offence, rejected bail and directed the trial Court to conclude the trial preferably within 5 months, both parties to support early disposal.

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

MCRC No. 3126 of 2026

¶5

1 - Raju Saxena S/o Bhadruram Saxena Aged About 20 Years R/o Village Kompara Vijaynagar P.S.- Kapu, District Raigarh (C.G.)

¶6

... Applicant

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In Charge Police StationKapu Distt. Raigarh (C.G.)

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

For Applicant : Mr. Ashutosh Mishra, Adv. For State : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Dy. G.A.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

¶12

Order on Board

¶13

05/05/2026

¶14

1. On 23.04.2026, learned counsel for the applicant was directed to file an affidavit stating how many witnesses had been examined before the trial Court. On this, learned counsel for the applicant orally submits that on 23.04.2026, out of 35 listed witnesses, 2 witnesses have been examined.

¶15

2. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 177/2022 registered at Police Station – Kapu, District Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34, 201/34, 435/34, 120-B of IPC.

¶16

3. The prosecution's story, in short, is that between 28.12.2022

¶17

HEERA LAL SAHU

¶18

Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.05.05 13:16:32 +0530

¶19

¶20

and 29.12.2022, at about 12:00 pm to 09:00 am, near the Kachcha road bridge from village Dhanpuri to Indakalo, the applicant along with other co-accused persons including one juvenile co-accused, conspired to cause the death of the deceased, Salik Ram Kujur. They caused the death of the deceased by inflicting injuries to his head, neck and legs with a tabbal, tangi, and a knife and destroyed the evidence by burning the dead body of the deceased in his car bearing registration No. CG-13-UC-7947. Thereafter, the police registered the FIR and submitted the charge sheet after completion of the investigation.

¶21

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that there is no direct and cogent evidence to connect the applicant with the alleged crime. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 31.12.2022, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant.

¶22

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that a motorcycle had been seized from the present applicant. He also submits that on 16.02.2026, the bail application of a co-accused, namely, Boat Sai Chouhan, was rejected by this Court on merit in MCRC No. 1190/2026, and the case of the present applicant is also similar to the said co-accused; therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, the applicant is also not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶23

6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

¶24

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the material available on record against the applicant 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 applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected .

¶25

¶26

8. However, considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 31.12.2022 and only 2 witnesses out of 35 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, preferably within a period of 5 months from the receipt of the copy of this order. Further, both parties are directed to support the early disposal of the trial.

¶27

9. Office is directed to sent a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.

¶28

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶29

H.L. Sahu

Raju Saxena v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Saxena 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Prajapati Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ganesh Ram Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Pintu Jangde Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Banti Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yashoda Mahant Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chandraprakash @ Shatrughan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh