1 2025:CGHC:21981 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3788 of 2025 1 - Chandrashekhar Sahu S/o Bahoran Sahu Aged About 26 Years R/o Ward No.19, Sarora P.S. Tilda Neora, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Applicant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through -Station House Officer (SHO) P.S. Tilda Neora, District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) & MCRC No. 3797 of 2025 1 - Ravi Vishwakarma S/o Kantoram Vishwakarma Aged About 26 Years R/o Ward No.19, Sarora P.S. Tilda Neora, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Dujram Sahu S/o Suresh Sahu Aged About 21 Years R/o Ward No.11, Sarora, Nayapara P.S. Tilda Neora, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Durgesh Dhruv S/o Virendra Dhruv Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No.18 Sarora, Nayapara P.S. Tilda Neora, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Applicant (s) versus 2 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (Sho) P.S. Tilda Neora, District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Applicant (s) : Shri Balraj Gupta, Advocate For Respondent / State : Shri Ashish Shukla, Addl. Adv. Gen. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 13/05/2025 The aforesaid two bail applications are being decided by this common order as they arise out of the same crime number. 1. The applicants have been arrested in connection with Crime No.525/2024 registered at police station – Tilda Neora, District – Raipur (CG). Applicants– Ravi Vishwakarma, Dujram Sahu and Durgesh Dhruv were arrested for alleged commission of offences under Section 191 (2), 103(A), 190 BNS, 1985 and Section 25 (1B) (b), 27 91) Arms Act and applicant – Chandrashekhar Sahu was arrested for the alleged commission of offence under Section 103(A), 191 (2), 193 (3), 190, of BNS. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that in the night of Diwali while gambling, dispute took place between the applicants and other accused persons and it is alleged that one of the accused – Ramnarayan Yadav assaulted Manish Kumar Yadav with knife who succumbed to the injuries. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants have been falsely implicated. The prosecution has not been able to bring home the guilt of the accused persons. It is submitted that memorandum and seizure witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution. It is further 3 submitted that the applicants are in jail since 04/11/2024 and trial is likely to take sometime, therefore, at this stage, the applicants may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes prayer and submits that as per the prosecution story, all the accused persons assaulted the deceased by fists and caused injuries with knife on the abdominal part of the deceased. It is submitted that one contusion wound was also found over the shoulder of the deceased. He submits that there are two eye witnesses of the incident namely Sunil and Durgesh. Therefore, he prays that the bail application may be rejected. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicants. Both the aforesaid bail applications are therefore rejected. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Deepti