1 2026:CGHC:12167 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2375 of 2026 Amarpal Singh @ Ankur S/o Dharmendra Singh Bhadouriya, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Masuri, Police Station Pawel, District- Bhind (M.P.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police of Police Station City Kotwali Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advcoate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13.03.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.123/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(8), 109(1), 312 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 13-05-2025 at about 8.55 PM, the police received the information with regard to the fire which was took place at Baradiya Jewellers and after reaching the place of incident, the police took Bhanwar Lal Baradiya and her daughter to Christian PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.03.16 16:59:21 +0530 2 Hostle Dhamtari and on being asked by the Police, Bhanwar Lal Baradiya informed the police that two unknown persons, who covered his faced with the clothes entered the shop on 13-05-2025 at about 8.30 and one of the person from the back side of Pistol assaulted him and his daughter was received bullet injuries. On the basis of said report, the police registered the offence and investigated the matter. During the course of investigation, the police arrested the applicant and recorded his memorandum statement and in the memorandum statement, the present applicant categorically stated that the present applicant and other co-accused persons were working as a driver, who used to drive their vehicle from Seepat to Dhamari at Bharat Mala Project and they saw a shop, in which a oldman and woman remained present and thereafter they has the conspiracy and on 13-05-2025, they entered into the jewellery shop of complainant and tried to loot the ornaments and when the act of applicant resisted by Bhanwar Lal Baradiya, he has been assaulted by the pistol from the back side and when the complainant Bhawar Lal Baradiya shouted at that time the daughter came there and after seeing the applicant, she ran toward the house and Ajay fired towards her, on account of which the daughter of Bhanwar Lal Baradiya i.e. Naina received bullet injuries on her leg and thereafter the applicants were absconded from there. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that during the course of investigation, the police arrested the present applicant for the commission of the alleged offence and, on the basis of his memorandum statement, an air pistol and 83 chharra pellets were allegedly seized. However, it is an admitted fact that the gunshot was not fired by the present applicant, rather, the same was fired by co-accused 3 Ajay Singh @ Golu Bhadoriya. Therefore, there is no allegation against the present applicant that he fired his gun towards the injured. So far as the injuries of complainant/Bhanwar Lal Baradiya are concerned, the same are simple in nature. As regards the injuries sustained by complainant’s daughter, she received a single firearm injury on her left leg. She has not suffered any bone injury and, as per the CT Scan report, no other obvious abnormality has been noted in the tibia, fibula, leg muscles, or other visualized structures. He later submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and the applicant is in jail since 23.11.2025. He also submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge sheet has already been filed. She further submitted that the applicant/accused, along with other co-accused persons, armed with deadly weapons such as an air gun and pistol, entered the jewellery shop of the complainant/Bhanwar Lal Baradia at night with a pre-planned intention to commit robbery. They assaulted the complainant and also shot the complainant’s daughter. Therefore, considering the seriousness of the offense, the manner in which the crime was committed, and the planned nature of the act, it does not appear appropriate to grant the benefit of bail to the applicant/accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the applicant/accused, along with other co-accused persons, 4 armed with deadly weapons such as an air gun and a pistol, entered the jewellery shop of the complainant at night with a pre-planned intention to commit robbery, and further considering that they assaulted the complainant and that one of the co-accused, namely Ajay Singh, shot the complainant’s daughter, this Court, having regard to the seriousness of the offence, the manner in which the crime was committed, and the planned nature of the act, is of the opinion that this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Amarpal Singh @ Ankur involved in Crime No.123/2025, registered at Police Station – City Kotwali Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(8), 109(1), 312 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti