MCRC/8140/2026 of SANJU SINGH THAKUR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 30 September 2026

1. Heard.

2. Admit.

3. The accused/applicant has moved this second bail application under Section 438 of BNSS, 2023 for releasing him on regular bail during trial in connection with Crime No.1057/2025 registered at

Police Station – Civil Lines, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 351(2), 3(5), 118(2), 296 and 324(4) of the BNS.

4. Vide order dated 09.03.2026, first bail application being MCRC No.1824/2026 (Annexure A-1) filed by the applicant was rejected on merit.

5. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on the date of incident i.e. 10.09.2025, when the victim was sitting with her younger brother at her tea stall, at about 5.00 PM, the applicant came there with his minor brother (juvenile offender) and asked the victim to leave the shop and come with him. After being explained by the persons present at the tea-stall, they left the place. Again at around 7.30 PM, the applicant along with juvenile offender came there and abused the victim by threatening to kill her and with the intention of killing her, poured petrol on her and set her on fire with a matchstick, due to which, the victim was severely burnt.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submits that according to the statement of victim, it is the juvenile accused who set the victim on fire and the people of the vicinity have not seen the present applicant setting the victim on fire. It has been also submitted that out of 10 witnesses, 04 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far, the applicant is in jail since 11.09.2025, there is no likelihood of his case being decided in near future, therefore, considering all the aforesaid aspects of the matter, the applicant may be extended privilege of bail.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposing the bail application submits that at the time of incident, the younger brother of the victim was sitting near her, who is the eye witness of the incident, has specifically stated against the applicant. She further submits that according to the MLC report, the victim suffered 30% burn injury and petrol bottle & shirt of the applicant have been seized from the applicant. It has been also submitted that the copy of court statement of the victim has not been submitted by the applicant. Therefore, the applicant may not be granted bail.

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

9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the fact that at the time of rejection of the applicant’s first bail on 09.03.2026, the trial had not commenced, and according to the applicant the trial has been commenced now, and out of 10 witnesses, 04 prosecution witnesses have been examined including the victim, however, the court statement of any of the witness has not been submitted, which does not constitute any change in circumstance, where the applicant may be released on bail. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant.

10. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant is rejected.

11. However, this Court direct the Trial Court to expedite the trial and conclude the case as early as possible.

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

Sd/-

(Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge pekde