1 2025:CGHC:12145 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 879 of 2025 1 - Narendra Tandon S/o Kanshi Prasad Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Dongri, Pendri, Thana Baloda, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S. Katghora, District - Korba- (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Shri Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Prabha Sharma, PL (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 11/03/2025 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. 69/2021 registered at police station Katghora, District Korba (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 302,201,120-B,328,365,34 of IPC. 2. Prosecution case in brief is that wife of co-accused Santoshi Bai Patley, wife of deceased Kanchram Patel had illicit relation with 2 the present applicant and therefore there was dispute between the present applicant ad the deceased. It is alleged that co-accused Santoshi Bai gave a contract to co-accused Purnima Sahu and Kamal Kumar Dhuri to commit murder of the deceased and gave a packet of poison (suhaga) and she paid Rs. 2,50 lacs to them. Two other persons namely Rishi Kumar and Ram Kumar Shrivas were also involved in the conspiracy. It is further alleged that the co- accused Purnima Sahu made a phone call to the deceased and when he came, she forcibly dragged him inside the car and administered poison and when his condition got deteriorated, they threw him on the roadside. It is also alleged that the applicant had inflicted some injuries with axe which caused his death. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that even if the entire case of prosecution is taken as it is, offence under the above Sections is not made ut against the present applicant. He further submits that the co-accused person Rishi Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 09.11.2022 in M.Cr.C. No. 8713/2022 and therefore the applicant may also be granted similar benefit. He submits that there were total 19 witnesses and out of which 13 witnesses have been examined and nothing has been stated by them against the applicant. Lastly, he submits that the applicant is in jail since 15.03.2021, the charge sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time, he is ready and willing to comply with any of the conditions which may be imposed upon him and thus, it is submitted that the application be allowed and the applicant be released on bail. 3 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application and submits that the applicant is the main accused and had given the contract of committing the murder of the Kanchram Patel. 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. On due consideration of the rival submissions, from the records it appears that the applicant is the main accused in the conspiracy and had given contract to kill the deceased therefore looking to the nature and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. Accordingly, his bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.03.19 11:10:38 +0530