Dismissed¶8

Dharmraj Sahu @ Dharmu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC5 Jul 2026MCRC/4539/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; MCRC No. 4539 of 2026; bail application rejected (06/07/2026); Justice Radhakishan Agrawal; Section 483 Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023; Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC; murder of mother (parricide); DNA profile from deceased's nail clippings matched accused; Crime No. 419/2024, P.S. Khamtarai, Raipur; co-accused father Domaar Singh Sahu; alleged staging of murder as suicide; applicant in jail since 23.09.2025; bail refused on nature and gravity of offence without commenting on merits.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the material available on record, and without commenting on the merits, the Court was not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. ¶6

Dharmraj Sahu @ Dharmu Vs State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

CGHC010181952026

2026:CGHC:27789

NAFR

Digitally signed by PRAKASH PRAKASH KUMAR KUMAR Date: 2026.07.06 17:45:55 +0530

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MCRC No. 4539 of 2026

¶8

Dharmraj Sahu @ Dharmu S/o Domar Singh Sahu, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Gourkheda, Near Sarkari Kuan, Police Station Kharora, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

... Applicant

¶10

versus

¶11

State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Khamtarai, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

... Respondent

¶13

For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For State/Respondent : Ms. Binu Sharma, P.L.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal,

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

06/07/2026

¶17

1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.419/2024, registered at P.S.- Khamtarai, District Raipur (C.G.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶18

2. Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 29.01.2024 at about 2:00 A.M., Kanti Sahu, mother of the applicant and wife of co-accused Domaar Singh Sahu, was brought dead to the hospital. During investigation, the

¶19

¶20

DNA profile obtained from the deceased's nail clippings allegedly matched with the DNA of the accused persons. It is further alleged that on 28.01.2024, following a quarrel, the co-accused husband assaulted the deceased, compressed her neck, and committed her murder. Thereafter, with the assistance of the present applicant, he allegedly attempted to portray the incident as a case of suicide. On the basis of the investigation and the material collected, including the memorandum statements, the present applicant was implicated and charge-sheeted.

¶21

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that applicant is the son of the deceased and co-accused Domaar Singh Sahu and on the date of incident, the applicant was not present in the room of the deceased, rather he was in another room of the same house. He further submits that at the most offence under Section 201 of IPC can be attracted. Applicant is in jail since 23.09.2025 and trial is likely to take some time, therefore, it is prayed that applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶22

4. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application filed by the applicant. She further submits that applicant is the son of the deceased and co-accused Domaar Singh Sahu and they both are involved in commission of the alleged offence. She further submits that the applicant had caught hold the hands of the deceased and co-accused had strangulated the deceased. As per the DNA report obtained from the deceased's nail clippings which has allegedly matched with the DNA of the accused persons.

¶23

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

¶24

¶25

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, and also material available on record, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶26

Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Radhakishan Agrawal) Judge

¶29

Prakash

Dharmraj Sahu @ Dharmu v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmraj Sahu @ Dharmu 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

Swapnil Mondal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sheikh Mohammed Junaid, Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vinod Kumar Tamboli Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nandkumar Dhruw @ Chhoti Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nemesh Dhiwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Prem Kumar Alias Premlal Thakur Vs State of Chhattisgarh