1 2026:CGHC:4484 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 260 of 2026 • Divya Sarthi D/o Late Babulal Sarthi Aged About 20 Years R/o Dhangaon P.S. Pusore Tehsil And District- Raigarh (C.G.) At Present R/o Hirapur Kotra Road Tehsil And District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Applicant. versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Thana -Kotwali, District- Raigarh (C.G.). --- Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Rishi Raj Pithawan, Dy. GA. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 27/01/2026 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.24/2025, registered at PS -Kotwali, District- Raigarh (C.G.), for commission of offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2), 331(8), 3(5) of the BNS. 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, namely Ashok Jaiswal, cousin of the deceased, lodged a report alleging that on the night of 13.01.2025, when he went to the house of the deceased, he found the door locked from inside. Upon calling out, no one responded. Thereafter, with the help of some persons, he broke open the door and found that his cousin brother, Sitaram Jaiswal and sister Annapurna Jaiswal, had been murdered by unknown persons. On the basis of the said report, an FIR was registered. During the course of investigation, the prosecution agency examined the CCTV footage installed in the vicinity of the place of occurrence, wherein two persons were seen leaving the spot on a motorcycle. Upon identification from the said footage, co- accused Kishan Sharma and Atul Dansena were identified. In their memorandum statements, name of the present applicant surfaced and, consequently, the present applicant was implicated and the alleged offences were registered against him. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case, he has not committed any offence as alleged. Applicant has been arrested without any substantive evidence and no memorandum statement of the applicant has been recorded. The only allegation against the applicant, as emerging from the memorandum statements of the co- accused persons, is that after the incident, the co-accused allegedly took shelter at the house of the present applicant. Thus, at best, the allegation is limited to harbouring the accused persons. Prosecution 3 has failed to establish the manner in which the applicant has been implicated or arrested, as there is no material connecting him in the chain of circumstances. The applicant was never present at the scene of occurrence, there is no eyewitness to the incident, and solely on the basis of the memorandum statements of co-accused persons, the applicant cannot be held liable for the offence of murder under Section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. There is no iota of evidence to show the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the alleged offence. The applicant is in judicial custody since 21.01.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Hence, prayer is made for grant of bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that two previous criminal antecedents are registered against the applicant. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering facts of the case, nature of allegation, submissions of counsel for the parties, particularly the fact that present applicant has been implicated in this case solely on the memorandum statements of main accused (Kishan Sharma and Atul Dansena), there is no evidence/material available on record to establish that present applicant was present at the time of alleged incident, as per CCTV footage two persons were seen leaving the spot on a motorcycle, which were identified as main accused persons (Kishan Sharma and Atul Dansena), further considering that sole allegation against the applicant is that main accused persons allegedly took 4 shelter at the house of the applicant after the incident, which at best, constitutes an allegation of harbouring, further considering the detention period of the applicant, charge-sheet has been filed, conclusion of the trial will take time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that applicant shall be released on regular bail, on his furnishing a bail bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in like sum to satisfaction of concerned Court on the conditions that- a) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court. b) Applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and c) Applicant shall appear before trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. 8. It is made clear that the observation made in the course of this order are only for considering the case of applicant on the application for grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by the observation made in the course of this order. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-