1 2026:CGHC:6040 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1144 of 2026 1 - Manish Chandrakar S/o Manik Lal Chandrakar Aged About 29 Years R/o Vill. Paterapali, Ward No. 07, Ps And Tahsil Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 2 - Lokesh Chandrakar S/o Late Hemlal Chandrakar Aged About 33 Years R/o Vill. Paterapali, Ward No. 07, Ps And Tahsil Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Non-applicant(s) MCRC No. 1159 of 2026 1 - Hemant Chandrakar S/o Late Iswar Lal Chandrakar Aged About 50 Years R/o Vill. Paterapali, Ward No. 07, Ps And Tahsil- Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Ankit Chandrakar S/o Manik Lal Chandrakar Aged About 27 Years R/o Vill. Paterapali, Ward No. 07, Ps And Tahsil- Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) --- Non-applicant(s) KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 For Applicant(s) : Mr. Kishore Bhaduri, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Harsh Dave, Advocate. For Non-applicant(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 03.02.2026 1. Since the above bail applications are arising out of same crime number and same offence so they are being heard and decided by this common order. 2. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.472/2025, registered at Police Station Mahasamund District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 127(7), 115(2), 308(2), 105, 238, 3(5) of BNS, 2023. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that the police of Police Station Mahasamund received information that the dead body of the deceased, Kaushal Sahis, was lying in the forest near the ground at Gothan. The body was identified by his family members and upon their questioning, they stated that the deceased had been caught by the villagers of village Paterapali on suspicion of theft. In this connection, Hemant Chandrakar and Ankit Chandrakar of village Paterapali, through Subhash Chandrakar and Monu Chandrakar, contacted Kachri Bai Sahis, the mother of the deceased, and informed her that Kaushal Sahis had been caught stealing and demanded ₹25,000/- for his release. Kachri Bai Sahis expressed 3 her inability to pay the said amount. During the inquest proceedings, statements of the deceased’s family members were recorded. On the basis of their information, villagers namely Baldau Dhruv, Basant Netam, Raju Yadav, Roshan Chandrakar, Mannulal Netam, and Paras Yadav were interrogated separately, and in their statements, they stated that on 25.10.2025, the deceased was allegedly burning cable wire near Mangalumuda Dam in village Paterapali and was caught and beaten by Hemant Chandrakar, Ankit Chandrakar, Manish Chandrakar, and Lokesh Chandrakar on suspicion of theft. The prosecution alleges that the accused tied the hands of the deceased with a towel and kept him near Mahavir Chowk, Paterapali, where he was assaulted while his hands were tied. At about 12:00 noon, he was allegedly freed and released, after which he staggered towards a cowshed and his body was later discovered in the forest near the cowshed grounds on 26.10.2025. It is further alleged that the accused persons assaulted him on suspicion of theft and demanded ₹25,000 from his family. Based upon such, aforementioned offences were registered against the applicants. 4. Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants submit that the allegations made against the applicants are wholly false, baseless, and do not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences, as even the medical evidence does not support a case of homicidal death, the MLC and subsequent medical query report describe the injuries as simple in nature and not sufÏcient to cause death. It is further submitted that although the alleged 4 incident is stated to have occurred during the intervening night of 25–26.10.2025, the police received information and registered the FIR only on 30.10.2025, after an unexplained delay of about five days, which creates serious doubt regarding the genuineness of the prosecution story. The applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated due to ulterior motives and malafide intentions, and the alleged confessional statements recorded in the memorandum are inadmissible in evidence as they were not voluntary but obtained under coercion, thus carrying no evidentiary value. The FIR and investigation suffer from material contradictions, procedural lapses and inconsistencies, striking at the root of the prosecution case. It is also submitted that the applicants have been in judicial custody for a considerable period, the investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, no further custodial interrogation is required, and continued detention would amount to pre-trial punishment. The applicants have no criminal antecedents and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel, opposes the bail applications and submits that the allegations against the present applicants namely Manish Chandrakar, Lokesh Chandrakar, Hemant Chandrakar, and Ankit Chandrakar are serious in nature and clearly made out from the FIR, statements of witnesses and the material collected during investigation. It is submitted that the deceased Kaushal Sahis was apprehended by the applicants on 5 suspicion of theft and was illegally restrained, his hands were tied with a towel, and he was mercilessly assaulted by the applicants near Mahavir Chowk, village Paterapali. The statements of independent villagers recorded under Section 161 BNSS specifically disclose that these applicants actively participated in beating the deceased. It is further alleged that Hemant Chandrakar and Ankit Chandrakar demanded an amount of ₹25,000/- from the mother of the deceased for his release, which establishes a clear motive and shows criminal intimidation and extortion. She further submtis that the deceased, after being brutally assaulted while his hands were tied, was released in a severely injured condition and ultimately succumbed, as his dead body was recovered the very next day from the forest area near the cowshed, clearly establishing a proximate link between the assault and the death. The delay in lodging the FIR has been sufÏciently explained, as the family members of the deceased were in a state of shock and fear and the offence came to light only after recovery of the dead body. The medical evidence, when read cumulatively with the ocular and circumstantial evidence, supports the prosecution case at this stage and the nature of injuries cannot be lightly brushed aside in a bail matter. The offences alleged are grave and serious, punishable under multiple sections of the BNS, involving unlawful restraint, assault, extortion, and culpable conduct leading to death, and therefore, the applicants do not deserve the discretionary relief of bail. She lastly submits that if released on bail, there is a strong likelihood of the applicants influencing witnesses, who belong to the 6 same village, and hampering the trial. Hence, considering the seriousness of the allegations, she prays for rejection of the present bail applications. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears from the case diary that the deceased was caught while burning cable wire to extract copper, whereupon the applicants apprehended him, tied his hands, took him before the Panchayat and allegedly gave only a few slaps and fist blows before releasing him. Thereafter, the deceased is stated to have gone towards the forest on his own, where his body was later found. The MLC report shows that the injuries were simple in nature and not sufÏcient in the ordinary course to cause death and thus, at this stage, a direct nexus between the alleged assault and the death is not prima facie established. The investigation is completed and the charge-sheet has been filed, therefore no further custodial interrogation is required. In these circumstances, continued incarceration of the applicants is not warranted. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail applications of the applicants are allowed. 9. Let applicants, Manish Chandrakar, Lokesh Chandrakar, Hemant Chandrakar and Ankit Chandrakar, involved in Crime No.472/2025, registered at Police Station Mahasamund District- Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 127(7), 115(2), 308(2), 105, 238, 3(5) of BNS, 2023, be released 7 on bail on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (each) in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse 8 of liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law. 10. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal