1 2026:CGHC:23006 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.Cr.C No.4569 of 2026 Purushottam Dewangan S/o Vishwanath Dewangan Aged About 33 Years R/o Village- Amora Police Station Palari District- Balodabazaar-Bhatapara (C.G.) (Particulars Of Applicant Are Mentioned Correctly As Per Chargesheet) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Khamhardih Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant ___________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.05.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 2nd Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.05.15 13:49:08 +0530 2 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.42/2025 registered at Police Station – Khamhardih, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 310(2), 331(5), 123, 351(3), 61(2), 168 and 238 of BNS, 2023 as also under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. Earlier application was rejected on merits vide order dated 06.01.2026 passed in M.Cr.C No.10415/2025. 2. That, as per the prosecution case, the complainant lodged a report alleging that on the date of incident, certain unknown persons entered his house and at gunpoint, looted cash amounting to Rs.66,25,000/-, three gold chains and three old mobile phones and thereafter fled from the spot. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present offences came to be registered against the present Applicant. Hence this application. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, who is in jail since 14.02.2025. It is further submitted that co-accused Kamlesh Verma has been granted bail vide order dated 13.05.2026 passed in M.Cr.C No.4491/2026 and co-accused Manuraj Mourya has been granted bail on 07.05.2026 passed in M.Cr.C No.4238/2026. Lastly, it is submitted that conclusion of trial is likely to take quite some 3 time, therefore, the Applicant may also be granted bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the present Applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the pre-trial detention and the fact that charge-sheet has been filed and particularly considering that co-accused Kamlesh Verma has been granted bail vide order dated 13.05.2026 passed in M.Cr.C No.4491/2026 and the third bail application of co-accused Manuraj Mourya was allowed vide order dated 07.05.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.4238/2026 on the ground that out of 21 prosecution witnesses, 9 have already been examined and further on the ground that two co-accused persons therein have already been granted bail by this Court and further considering the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 7. Let Applicant- Purushottam Dewangan involved in Crime 4 No.42/2025 registered at Police Station – Khamhardih, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 310(2), 331(5), 123, 351(3), 61(2), 168 and 238 of BNS, 2023 as also under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. 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 him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant 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 sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against 5 him in accordance with law. 8. 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 Priya