1 CRA No. 1822 of 2025 2025:CGHC:55785-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1822 of 2025 1. Somaru @ Kolu S/o Late Shri Fagnu Ram Kavde Aged About 56 Years R/o Village - Bhainsgaon, Mavlipara, Police Station - Korar, Tahsil - Kanker District - North Baster Kanker Chhattisgarh 2. Laxman Nureti S/o Late Shri Pratap Nureti Aged About 44 Years R/o Village - Bhainsgaon, Mavlipara, Police Station - Korar, Tahsil - Kanker District - North Baster Kanker Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Korar, District - North Baster Kanker Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 17/11/2025 JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.11.18 10:15:01 +0530 2 CRA No. 1822 of 2025 1. This appeal under Section 21 (4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the order dated 13.03.2025 passed in Crime No.128/2015 by the Special Judge (N.I.A Act) Kanker, (C.G.), thereby rejecting the bail application preferred by the appellant. 2. The appellant has been arrested on 09.03.2025 in connection with crime No. 128/2015 for the commission of offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 323,506-B, 307 of IPC and 25 & 27 of Arms Act and 10,13,19,38 (2), 39(2) of UA(P) Act and his application for bail filed under section 483 of the B.N.S.S. has been rejected by the Special Judge vide order dated 13.03.2025. 3. (a) The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 26/10/2015 the complainant, Bajaru Ram Shori, reported at Police Station Korar that on 24/10/2015 around 11:00 PM, near Bhaisgaon Anganwadi, several armed Naxalites—Raje Kange, Sonu, Rainu, Pilaram, Shravan, Tiju, Some, Rekha, Reshmi, 5–6 unidentified members and the present appellants (residents of Bhaisgaon) along with Kunwar Singh Gota of Muragaon, convened a village meeting. They allegedly assaulted the complainant, Sunita, Manuram, and others, accusing them of being police informers, threatened to kill them if they did not leave the village, used abusive language, beat Sunita with a stick, and attempted to kill the complainant. Based on this report, a crime was registered. 3 CRA No. 1822 of 2025 (d) After arrest, the appellant filed an application under Section 483 BNSS for grant of bail before the Special Court (NIA), Kanker which was rejected by the impugned order dated 13.03.2025. Thus, this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed any act attracting offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 294, 323,506-B, 307 of IPC and 25 & 27 of Arms Act and 10,13,19,38 (2), 39(2) of UA(P) Act. The appellant has been arrayed as an accused without any cogent evidence, solely on the basis of suspicion he has been implicated. He further submits that the allegation against the appellant is only that he was present in the meeting. He further submits that it was meeting of the village and as a villager he was present in the meeting. He further submits that there is no recovery of any incriminating material from the appellant. He further submits that he is in jail since 09.03.2025 and has no past antecedents. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the State, opposes the submission made and submits that charges have also been framed. He also submits that involvement of the appellant in the naxalite or CPI (Maoist) activities cannot be ruled out as there are ample evidences against the appellant which come to fore after investigation. He further submits that there are total 7 accused 4 CRA No. 1822 of 2025 persons in the present case and 3 have been arrested and 4 are absconding. Thus, this Criminal Appeal claiming for bail, is liable to be dismissed. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the appeal memo. 7. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, we find merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant. The allegation against the appellant is limited to his mere presence at a village meeting, which, by itself, does not prima facie establish his involvement in the commission of offences alleged under the IPC, Arms Act, or UA(P) Act. No incriminating material or weapon has been recovered from his possession, and there is no evidence indicating his participation in any overt act. The charges framed are based primarily on general and omnibus allegations without specific attribution of role to the appellant. He has been in custody since 09.03.2025, has no criminal antecedents, thus without making any observation on the merits of the case, we are of the opinion that present is a fit case to release the appellant on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. 5 CRA No. 1822 of 2025 9. The appellant is directed to be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of 25,000/- with one surety in the like ₹ sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. He is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given by the said Court. 10. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti/Gowri