1 2026:CGHC:23334 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4638 of 2026 Kunwar Singh S/o Ramkumar Singh Bhadouriya Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Inguri, Police Station Pawel, Tahsil And District Bhind M.P. ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station City Kotwali Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. 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 the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story 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 VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.05.18 15:16:23 +0530 2 took place at Baradiya Jewellers and after reaching the place of incident, the police took Bhanwar Lal Baradiya and her daughter to Christian Hospital Dhamtari and on being asked by the Police, Bhanwar Lal Baradiya informed the police that two unknown persons, who covered their 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 co-accused Ajay Singh @ Golu Bhadouriya and recorded his memorandum statement 26-11-2025 at 16.30 hrs and in the memorandum statement co-accused, he mentioned that he has the conspiracy along with the applicant and other accused persons and thereafter he (Ajay Singh @ Golu Bhadoriya and allegation against the applicant is that he was waiting outside, when two of the accused persons went inside the shop and then came from the shop, the present applicant was waited for them and thereafter all of three persons fled away from the motorcycle statements of applicant and the applicant has been arrested from the commission of alleged offences. 3. 3. The applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is respectfully submitted that though the bail application of co-accused Amarpal Singh @ Ankur was dismissed by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 13.03.2026, the case of the present applicant stands on a different footing, as the specific allegation against him is only that he was allegedly waiting outside the 3 shop while the other two co-accused entered inside, and thereafter all three fled away on a motorcycle. The entire case against the present applicant is based solely upon the memorandum statements of co- accused persons and his own memorandum, and except for his mobile phone, nothing incriminating has been seized from his possession. Further, prosecution witness PW-1, Bhanwar Lal Baradiya, in his deposition has specifically stated that only two persons had entered the shop and identified only those two accused persons; no Test Identification Parade was conducted in respect of the present applicant, and in paragraph 15 of his deposition he admitted having seen only two accused persons, which prima facie does not establish the involvement of the present applicant. It is further submitted that although reliance has been placed upon call detail records, no conversation or other material has been produced by the prosecution to connect the applicant with the commission of the alleged offence. The applicant is in judicial custody since 23.11.2025, the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude, he is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with prosecution evidence, and he is ready and willing to furnish adequate surety and abide by all such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon’ble Court; hence, he deserves to be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed. He further submitted that the present 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, 4 Bhanwar Lal Baradia, during the night with a pre-planned intention to commit robbery. It was further submitted that the accused persons assaulted the complainant and also fired upon the complainant’s daughter. Learned State Counsel further submitted that the bail application of co-accused Amarpal Singh @ Ankur has already been rejected by this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, considering the gravity and seriousness of the offence, the manner in which the crime was allegedly committed, and the premeditated nature of the act, it would not be appropriate to extend the benefit of bail to the present applicant/accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the material available on record, particularly the allegation that the applicant/accused, along with other co-accused persons, armed with deadly weapons such as an air gun and a pistol, entered the jewellery shop of the complainant during the 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, fired upon the complainant’s daughter, as well as the fact that the bail application of co-accused Amarpal Singh @ Ankur has already been rejected by this Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that having regard to the seriousness and gravity of the offence, the manner in which the crime was allegedly committed, and the premeditated nature of the act, this is not a fit case to enlarge the 5 applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application filed by the applicant stands rejected. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Kunwar Singh, 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 the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act, is rejected. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. 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 vaibhav