1 2025:CGHC:21985 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3335 of 2025 1 - Virendra Kumar Armo S/o Radheshyam Armo Aged About 28 Years R/o Morga Chowki, Morga, Police Station Bango, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Pasan, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Jitendra Pali, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri U.K.S.Chandel, Dy.Advocate General (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 13/05/2025 The applicant has filed this bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrrik Suraksha Sanhita for grant of regular bail as he is in custody in connection with Crime No. 03/2025 registered at police station police outpost Korbi, Police Station Pasan, District Korba (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 103 (1),109, 3(5) and 103 of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2 2. As per prosecution case, on 06.01.2025, at about 8.55 pm. written report was lodged by the complainant alleging that his nephew Krishna Pandey had been shot by unknown person and fled away. On the basis of the said FIR, offence was registered against unknown persons under Section 109 of the BNS. During investigation, on 16.01.2025, memorandum statement of the accused Ram Kumar was recorded and on his disclosure, one motor cycle used in the crime was seized. On disclosure of the statements, a pistol, magazine and bullets were seized and the applicant was arrested. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. He submits that the entire case of prosecution is based on the memorandum statement of co-accused which is inadmissible and in absence of any corroborating material or recovery attributed to the applicant, the statement alone cannot justify the applicant's continued incarceration. He further submits that no overt act has bee assigned to the applicant and nothing incriminating material or weapon has been recovered from the present applicant. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and only on the basis of the statement of the co- accused he has been made accused. Lastly, he submits that the applicant is in jail since 16.01.2025, the charge sheet has been filed and the trial will take time to conclude thus he would pray for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From the perusal of the case diary, it appears that the case against the applicant is based on the memorandum statement of co-accused Gajendra Singh and there is no recovery from the present applicant. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 16.01.2025, charge sheet has been filed and 3 there is no evidence with regard to the conversation between the applicant and accused Gajendra Singh as alleged by the prosecution. The allegation against the present applicant is that he had facilitated Gajendra Singh for purchase of pistol and some cartridges. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the involvement of the applicant in the present case, I am inclined to allow this application. Accordingly, the application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS by the applicant for grant of regular bail is allowed. 8. It is directed that in the event of each of the applicants executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, the applicant shall be released on bail, on following conditions :- (i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court, (ii)he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and (iii)he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court till disposal of the trial, (iv)he shall not involve himself in any offence of similar nature in future. 9. The observation made in the course of this order are only for considering the case of applicant on the application for grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by the observation made in the course of this order. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.05.13 17:55:43 +0530