1 2026:CGHC:22982 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4544 of 2026 1 - Ajay Dongre Alias Karan Dongre Son Of Mahendra Dongre Aged About 19 Years Resident Of Ward No. 13, Achanak Nagar, Gauri Nagar, O.P. Chikhali Police Station and District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Kotwali Rajnandgaon District Rajnanadgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 14/05/2026 1. This is the First bail application filed u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.748/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) and 238 of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, the applicant is the brother-in-law of the deceased, Monika Ramteke. It is alleged that deceased Monika Rameke’s husband Ravi Rameteke, the applicant and mother-in- HEERA LAL SAHU Digitally signed by HEERA LAL SAHU Date: 2026.05.14 16:45:09 +0530 2 law strangulated the deceased to death with a rope. Based on this, offence has been registered against the present applicant and other co-accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is a brother-in-law of the deceased and his case is similar to the co-accused Pramila Ramteke (mother-in-law of the deceased), who has already been granted bail by this Court on 07.04.2026 in MCRC No. 3096/2026; therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the basis of parity. He also submits that there is no seizure from the present applicant; the applicant is in jail since 07.12.2025, there is a total of 27 listed witnesses in this case, charges have not been framed, and the trial has not commenced yet. Therefore, there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded at the earliest. Hence, considering all these facts, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, opposing the bail application, submits that the co-accused, namely Pramila Ramteke, has been granted bail because there was only an allegation against the co-accused to stand on the gate, but the present applicant played an active role in committing the murder of the deceased. Therefore, considering the gravity of the offence, at this stage, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature and gravity of the offence and the material collected and available on record against the applicant, 3 and further considering that the case of the present applicant is different from the co-accused Pramila, without commenting on the merits of the case, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands rejected. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE H.L. Sahu