1 2025:CGHC:42437 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6187 of 2025 Karan Sahu S/o Uman Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Dandgaon, Police Station City Kotwali, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali Mungeli, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Ms. Indrapreet Kaur Chhabra, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 21/08/2025 1. The applicant has preferred this 1st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 109/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District- Mungeli (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238, 191(2) of BNS and Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. 2. According to the prosecution, a quarrel erupted on April 3, 2025, between the applicant, co-accused (including a juvenile), and Dharmendra and Tikendra Sahu. The applicant allegedly instigated the co-accused, leading to an assault on both victims. Tikendra Sahu was fatally stabbed, sustaining grievous injuries, resulting in his death. Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant. 2 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime in question. The main perpetrator is a juvenile co-accused to whom the knife has been seized. There is no seizure from the applicant. The applicant has been implicated only on the basis of memorandum statement of juvenile accused. Furthermore, the juvenile accused has been granted bail and the other three major co-accused have also been granted bail. Further, the applicant is in jail since 05.04.2025 and the trial is likely to some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State and Objector oppose the bail application and submits that there are sufficient evidence available on record against the applicant, therefore, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and prosecution evidence, I note that co-accused Rahul, Shubham, and Naruttam were granted bail (MCRC No.4868/2025, order dated July 15, 2025). Although no seizure was made from them or the applicant, eyewitness Dharmendra's statement implicates the applicant as the main accused who initiated the quarrel. Given this, and the seizure of a knife from the juvenile co- accused, at this stage, without commenting on merits of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is Rejected. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Shubham