Dismissed¶26

Satish Kursunghe v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC6 May 2026MCRC/4270/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MCRC No. 4270 of 2026, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, decided 07/05/2026 by Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal – second bail application of Satish Kursunghe under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 rejected; Crime No. 195/2025, P.S. Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon; Sections 103(1) & 115(1) of BNS; first bail application dismissed on merit on 18.02.2026 in MCRC No. 1357/2026 with 4-month trial-completion direction to trial Court; change-of-circumstances plea found insufficient; applicant in custody since 06.05.2025. Advocates: Anil Tawadkar (Applicant); Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G.A. (State).

What did the court decide?

After dismissal of the first bail application, the change of circumstances stated by counsel for the applicant is not of such a character as to warrant grant of bail. ¶25

Satish Kursunghe Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4270 of 2026

¶4

1 - Satish Kursunghe Son of Vasudev Kursunghe Aged About 34 Years Resident of Kandrapara, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

¶5

versus

¶6

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Respondent

¶8

For Applicant : Mr. Anil Tawadkar, Adv.

¶9

For Respondent/State : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G.A.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal

Order on Board

07/ 05/ 2026

Heard.

Admit.

The accused/applicant has moved this second bail application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No. 195/2025 registered at Police Station – Dongargarh, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) & 115(1) of BNS.

¶16

Digitally signed by HEERA HEERA LAL LAL SAHUDate: SAHU 2026.05.07 16:41:12 +0530

¶17

¶18

The first bail application of the applicant had been dismissed on merit on 18.02.2026 in MCRC No. 1357/2026.

¶19

As per the prosecution’s case, on 04.05.2025, over some dispute, the applicant assaulted Sanjay Uike and complainant Mithun Yadav with a bamboo stick due to which the complainant sustained injuries and Sanjay Uike died on the way to the hospital. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that when the first bail was decided only 7 witnesses haven examined, out of total 18 listed witness. Now, 10 witnesses have been examined before the trial Court. The applicant is in jail since 06.05.2025, and the trial is likely to take considerable time to be finalised, therefore, the present applicant may be released on bail.

¶21

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient evidence against the present applicant and the nature of death is homicidal as per the doctor’s statement; therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, at this stage, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶22

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

¶23

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the material available on record, the

¶24

¶25

evidence collected by the prosecution against the applicant and also looking to the fact that after dismissal of the first bail application of the applicant, the change of circumstances stated by the counsel for the applicant is not to the effect to grant bail to the applicant, and on 18.02.2026 in MCRC No. 1357/2026, the trial Court was directed to conclude the trial within a period of 4 month from the receipt of a copy of that order, the said stipulated time has not been completed till date, therefore, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶26

Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, is rejected .

¶27

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

Satish Kursunghe v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Kursunghe v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Kumar Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Hadma Kurami Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shailesh Kumar Rai @ Mintu Rai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Samaru @ Chumtul Satnami Vs Raju Nayak

Rupa Yadav Vs Dinesh Kumar Yadav

Smt. Punni Bai Vs Raju Nayak