1 2026:CGHC:19546 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3854 of 2026 1 - Smt. Hiraundi Bai W/o Shri Jhamman Sapre, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village Newaspur, P.S. City Kotwali Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S. City Kotwali Mungeli, Distt Mungeli Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 28/04/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.530/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali Mungeli, Dist.- Mungeli (CG) for offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 351(3), 103(1), 109(1), 117(2), 61(2), 191(2), 191(3) & 190 of BNS. 2. In this case there are total 8 accused persons in which 7 are major and 1 is juvenile accused. As per the prosecution case, the complainant, Prafulla Sonkar, lodged a report at City Kotwali Mungeli alleging that on 11.12.2025 at about 3:30 pm, SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2026.04.28 14:47:26 +0530 2 he was informed by Gendlal Sonkar that co-accused Jhamman Sapre and his family members were forcibly harvesting crops from their field in Nevaspur. Upon hearing this, the complainant along with his brothers Ajit Sonkar & Nikhil Sonkar, father Rohit Sonkar, mother Purnima Sonkar, and grandfather Janak Sonkar (now deceased) reached the field at approximately 03:45 pm and stopped the accused persons from harvesting the crop. In response, co-accused Jhamman Sapre, Vimal Sapre, Doojram and Dwarika acting with common intention, started hurling filthy abuses and assaulted them with sticks, iron axe and fists. As a result of which, the complainant, his parents and grandfather Janak Sonkar suffered grievous injuries. Following the complainant's report, a criminal case was registered against the applicant and other accused persons and investigation was initiated. The injured were taken to the District Hospital Mungeli for treatment and during the course of treatment, Janakram Sonkar died due to his injuries. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to land dispute. He submits that both the Merg and the FIR specifically name four individuals as accused, with no mention of the applicant’s involvement. Furthermore, the applicant's name does not appear in the statements recorded under Section 161 of the CrPC. The sole basis for prosecuting the applicant is his identification by the injured, Prafulla and Ajit, during the Test Identification Parade (TIP). No incriminating articles have been seized from the applicant and his name is also not mentioned in 3 the FIR. In the similar facts, co-accused Roop Narayan Ahire, Pranay Sahu and one juvenile accused have already been granted bail. The applicant is in jail since 16.12.2025 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest. Hence, considering all these facts, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application, submitting that the applicant was specifically named in the memorandum statement of co-accused, Vimal. It is further submitted that the applicant was identified by the injured during the Test Identification Parade and there is an active participation of the applicant in the alleged offence. Hence, considering the nature of offence, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the material collected and available on record and also considering the facts that the applicant is a lady and has been in custody since 16.12.2025, other co- accused have already been granted bail by this Court and there is all possibility of the trial taking considerable time for its conclusion, this Court is of the opinion that a case for grant of bail to the applicant has been made out. 7. Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is allowed. It is directed that the present Applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with 4 one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court. The applicant is directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date to be given to him by the said Court till completion of the trial. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Sourabh P. JUDGE