SAMMAIYA BURKA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010320822026 2026:CGHC:38340
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7969 of 2026
Sammaiya Burka S/o Chinna Mutta Aged About 40 Years R/o
Dugaiguda, P.S. Aawapalli, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Aawapalli, District
Bijapur Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s)
Digitally
signed by
AKHILESH
KUMAR
DEWANGAN
AKHILESH
KUMAR
DEWANGAN
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
31.08.2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for
short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 19/2025, registered at Police Station
Aawapalli, District Bijapur (CG) for the offence punishable under
Sections 109(1) of BNS.

2
2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 22.11.2025 at about 1:00
a.m., after having dinner, the complainant, Kanta Burka and the
accused, Samaiya Burka, being husband and wife, were sleeping
in their room. The accused, suspecting the character of his wife
and her alleged illicit relationship, became enraged and assaulted
her with a sharp-pointed knife lying nearby, causing injuries to her
chest and back, which led to the registration of alleged offence
against the applicant and subsequently, the applicant was
arrested. Hence, the bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further
submit that no incriminating article, weapon or other material
allegedly connected with the offence has been seized or
recovered from the possession of the applicant. Further, the
injured/victim, who is the material witness to the alleged
occurrence, did not support the prosecution case during her
examination-in-chief and was declared hostile, specifically
denying the alleged incident and the involvement of the applicant.
The prosecution case is also not supported by any independent
eye-witness. He also submits that the material available on record
does not prima facie disclose any specific intention or knowledge
on the part of the applicant to cause the death of the
injured/victim, which is an essential ingredient for attracting the
offence under Section 109(1) of the BNS. The applicant is in jail

3
since 23.11.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its
conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail
application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in
the present case before the competent Court. She further submits
that the allegation against the applicant is that, while suspecting
his wife’s character and alleged illicit relationship, he assaulted
her with a sharp-pointed knife, causing injuries to her chest and
back. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.
5.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the facts & circumstances of the case, nature &
gravity of the offence, material available in the case dairy and the
fact that on account of suspicion regarding the character and
alleged illicit relationship of his wife, the present applicant
allegedly assaulted her with a sharp-pointed knife, causing
injuries to her chest and back, though the injured witness has
turned hostile and has not supported the prosecution case, the
factum of injuries having been caused to the complainant by a
sharp-edged weapon is borne out from the material available on
record, as such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to
enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant- Sammaiya Burka,

4
involved in Crime No. 19/2025, registered at Police Station
Aawapalli, District Bijapur (CG) for the offence punishable under
Sections 109(1) of BNS, is rejected .
8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall
make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously
preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt
of certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, if there is no
legal impediment.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Akhil