Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date:

2025.11.28

10:31:48 +0530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9596 of 2025

1 - Mohan Rajgir S/o Murarka Rajgir Aged About 30 Years R/o Railway Maharashtra Mandal Tikrapara Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... applicant(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For applicant (s) : Mr. Jitendra Banjara, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Dubey, Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.

Order on board

26.11.2025.

on 11.12.2021 in Crime No. 401/2021 registered at P.S. City Kotwali, Bilaspur for the offence under Section 302 of IPC. The first bail application of the applicant has been rejected on 15.10.2025 by this Court in MCRC No 7900/2025.

2. The case of the prosecution is that in the intervening night of 8-9 December, 2021, the applicant committed murder of his wife by causing injuries on her head, while pushing her into wall. On 09.12.2021, the wife of applicant died. Merg was intimated to the police and after investigation the applicant was arrested on 11.12.2021 and charge-sheet was filed.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that there is no eye witness to the incident and all the witnesses have been turned hostile and not supported the prosecution’s case. The deceased has died due to fallen on the ground and the applicant has not caused any injuries to the deceased. It is only on an apprehension that he committed the murder of his wife, he implicated in the alleged offence. The applicant is in jail since 11.12.2021 and till date, trial of the case is not concluded. Therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submitted that while considering the merits of the case, the first bail application of the applicant has been rejected. The burden is upon the applicant to explain the injury found on the body of the deceased as the relevant point of time, the deceased and the applicant were in the room. The deceased is the wife of the applicant and she died due to head injury. Out of the 17 witnesses, 13 witnesses have already been examined and trial is at its advance stage, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material annexed with the bail application.

6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, considering the nature of allegation and material collected during the investigation as well as the fact that the applicant is the husband of the deceased and both of them were inside the room, the burden shifts upon the applicant to explain the injuries found on the body of the deceased, total 13 witnesses have been examined till date and the trial of the case is at its advance stage, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail.

hereby rejected.

Sd/-

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)

Judge

Sagrika