1 2025:CGHC:41404-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1502 of 2025 1 - Kursam Hiriya S/o Kondaram Hiriya Aged About 32 Years R/o Urasa Para Mandem Farsegarh Bhairamgarh Distt. Bijapur C.G. 2 - Shivram Kursam S/o Mandoram Kursam Aged About 22 Years R/o Kuprel Para Mandem Bhairamgarh Distt. Bijapur C.G. 3 - Budhoo Kursam S/o Doli Kursam Aged About 40 Years R/o Skoolpara Farsegarh Bhairamgarh Distt. Bijapur C.G. 4 - Kishor Kumar (Kishor Kumar Kursam) S/o Maida Ram Aged About 23 Years R/o Urasa Para Kuprel Farsegarh Bhairamgarh Distt. Bijapur C.G. 5 - Binod Michha S/o Kima Michha Aged About 23 Years R/o Kuprel Mandem Farsegarh Bhairamgarh Distt. Bijapur C.G. 6 - Ramprasad Kursam S/o Hiriya Kursam Aged About 27 Years R/o Kuprel Mandem Farsegarh Bhairamgarh Distt. Bijapur C.G. 7 - Dinesh Kumar S/o Viij Ram (Vijjaram) Aged About 32 Years R/o Mandem Farsegarh Bhairamgarh Distt. Bijapur C.G. 8 - Sumit Kumar Kursam S/o Budhu Kursam (Buidhuram) Aged About 24 Years R/o Mandem Farsegarh Bhairamgarh Distt. Bijapur C.G. --- Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Farsegarh Distt. Bijapur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) 2 CRA No. 1460 of 2025 Baldev Kuhrami @ Tulsi Kuhrami S/o Bhima Kuhrami Aged About 31 Years R/o Choteaadawal Thana Farsegarh District - Bijapur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Farsegarh District - Bijapur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Appellant : Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr. Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 18/08/2025 1 Heard Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. Hariom Rai, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. 2 Cr.A. No. 1502/2025 is an appeal filed by the appellants under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Act, 2008, by which they are challenging the order dated 15.05.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge, NIA Act/Sch. Off. Revenue District Sukma and Bijapur, Place South Bastar, Dantewada in NIA Sch. Off. Case No. 01/2024. 3 Mr. Vikas Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellants {Cr.A. No. 1502/2025} submits that the appellants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 1/2024 registered at Police Station, Farsegarh, District Bijapur, for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC, Section 3 and 5 of Explosive Substances Act and 3 Sections 10, 13, 16, 20, 23, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activity (Prevention) Act, 1967. 4 According to Mr. Shrivastava, the appellants had preferred an application under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, which has been rejected by the learned Special Judge, NIA / Scheduled Offences, Revenue District Sukma, Bijapur, Dakshin Bastar, Dantewada, vide order dated 15.05.2025. 5 It is submitted by Mr. Shrivastava that though the appellants are in no manner involved in the offence in question, but still the police is searching for them and the appellants apprehend that they may be arrested and arrayed as accused in the present case and as such, he prays that the appellants may be granted anticipatory bail. 6 At the outset, Mr. Hariom Rai, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent submits that as per the instructions received by him, neither the appellants {in Cr.A. No. 1502/2025} are named in the FIR nor their name appears in the charge sheet filed by the respondent and hence, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed being not maintainable. 7 In view of the above submission, Mr. Shrivastava submits that he may be permitted to withdraw this appeal with liberty to take recourse to appropriate forum, if occasion arises. 8 In view of the above submission, this appeal {Cr.A. No. 1502/2025} is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to take recourse to appropriate forum, if occasion arises. 9 So far as Cr.A. No. 1460/2025 is concerned, the appellant-Baldev Kuhrami @ Tulsi Kuhrami was arrested by Police of Police Station Farsegarh, District Bijapur, on 17.08.2024 in Crime No. 1/2024 for the 4 offences under Sections 147, 148, 307 of IPC and Section 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act as well as Sections 186, 353, 120B of IPC, Section 10(20), 13(1), 16, 20, 23, 23(2) and 39 of Unlawful Activity (Prevention) Act, 1967. His second bail application under Section 483 of the BNSS has been rejected by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, South Bastar, Dantewada vide order dated 18.06.2025. 10 As per the prosecution story, on 15.05.2024, the complainant made an oral complaint at Police Station, Farsegarh that on the fateful day, he alongwith Head Constable No. 1236 went to confirmation of naxalite information on his private vehicle and when they reached near village Sonampalli, Gannam Nala, the naxalites ambushed by causing explosion and due to this act, their vehicle got damaged and when they came out of their vehicles, the naxalites fled away. Upon the complaint of the complainant, the FIR bearing Crime No. 1/2024 was registered. 11 It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant {in Cr.A. No. 1460/2025} that the appellant has been falsely roped in this case. Earlier also, he was made an accused in Crime No. 10/2017 by the police of Police Station, Farsegarh but later on, he was acquitted vide order dated 10.08.2024. He further submits that the name of the appellant is not in the FIR and further, the appellant was arrested after more than three months of the date of registration of the FIR. Merely on the basis of seizure of some naxalite literature during the course of investigation, he has been made accused in this case. The appellant is ready and willing to abide by any terms and conditions imposed by this Court while releasing him on bail. 12 On the other hand, Mr. Hariom Rai, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondent strongly opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the appellant are grave in nature and is an 5 organized crime. It is further submitted that the trial has commenced and made substantial progress and only five witnesses are left to be examined. 13 From perusal of the materials available on record, and considering the nature and gravity of the offence and that the allegations against the appellant-Baldev Kuhrami @ Tulsi Kuhrami are grave and serious in nature as they involve allegation of causing ambush upon security personnel and further since the investigation has been completed and the trial has also commenced and made substantial progress as only five witnesses are left to be examined, we are of the opinion that it is not a fit case where the appellant should be enlarged on bail. 14 As such, this appeal {Cr.A. No. 1460/2025} stands dismissed. However, this Court hopes and trust that the learned trial Court would make all endeavours to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.08.19 11:49:45 +0530