1 2026:CGHC:8885 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1360 of 2026 Shailesh Katre S/o Shivlal Katre Aged About 32 Years R/o Changorabhata, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through- Station House Officer, Police Station- Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.) ... Respondent For the Applicant : Mr. A. D. Kuldeep & Ms. Khushbu Sahu Advocates on behalf of Mr. C. R. Sahu, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Advocate General (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 19.02.2026 1. This is first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No.466/2025 registered at Police Station Khairagarh, Distt. Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan (CG) for the offences under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 3(5), 103(1) of BNS 2023. ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by ALLENA ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2026.02.20 11:39:11 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 07.10.2025 the complainant/deceased Mohanlal has lodged the report stating that in their village the idol of goddess Saraswati has been installed in a Pandal and he alongwith one Ramsukh Banjare were sleeping in the night as Pandal Staff. At that time, 3 unknown persons opened the Amply box with the intention to snatch away the sound box and wire. The complainant and his colleague got up and resisted the said act, on which, the accused persons abused them in filthy language and assaulted them with iron rod, due to which, they sustained injuries. On raising alarm, the locals of neighborhood came there and seeing them, the accused ran away. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is said to have taken place on 07.10.2025 and the complainant had died much after on 25.10.2025 i.e., after 18 days of the incident and it cannot be said that the death of complainant was caused due to the said assault. He further submits that neither the FIR nor the statement of deceased/ complainant recorded u/s 161 CrPC does not mention the name of the applicant and further no seizure was made from him. He next submits that the Test Identification Parade was also not conducted. He submits that applicant is in jail since 26.10.2025; the charge sheet has been filed and there are total 19 prosecution witnesses in this case and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the FIR was filed by the deceased himself and his 161 CrPC statement was recorded. 3 5. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the over-all facts situation of the case especially the fact that either the FIR or 161 CrPC statement of deceased/complainant does not mention the name of applicant and further looking to his custody period, I am inclined to release the applicant on regular bail. 6. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed in that behalf. Cc as per rules. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Rao