1 2026:CGHC:27152 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5841 of 2026 1 - Chhabi Dewangan @ Robin S/o Late Rajendra Dewangan Aged About 19 Years R/o Dewar Basti Near Urla Talab Police Station Urla, District- Raipur (C.G.) Present R/o Subhash Nagar, Dewarpara, Police Station Telibandha District- Raipur (C.G.) (As Per Charge Sheet) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Telibandha, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Shivendu Pandya, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 02/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed u/s 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.695/2024 registered at Police Station Telibandha, District- Raipur (CG) for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of BNS and Sections 25, 27, 25(1-B)(b) & 27(3) of Arms Act. BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2026.07.03 13:56:16 +0530 2 2. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the applicant is that on 31.10.2024, at about 7:30 p.m., he, along with the other co-accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted the deceased, Krish Verma, with iron pipe and spring- edged knife, thereby causing grievous injuries which resulted in his death. On the basis of the report lodged in this regard by the complainant, Ku. Sanjana Verma, the present crime was registered, and the applicant was arrested on 02.11.2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the co-accused, Bajaj Sahu, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 09.03.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No.1836/2026. Therefore, on the ground of parity, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. He submits that although the prosecution has cited 24 witnesses, not a single prosecution witness has been examined till date. He further submits that the applicant is in jail since 02.11.2024 and there is no likelihood of the trial to be concluded at the earliest. Hence, considering all these facts, the applicant may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is the main accused in the case. There is direct evidence against him as there are four eye-witnesses. It is further submitted that the weapon of offence, a knife, has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. The case of the present applicant stands on a different footing 3 from that of the co-accused, Bajaj Sahu, who has been granted bail. Therefore, having regard to the nature and gravity of the offence and the material available on record, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged 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 offence and the material collected and available on record against the applicant and also considering the fact that the applicant is alleged to be the main accused and that the knife allegedly used in the commission of the offence, has been recovered from his possession, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail at this stage. 7. Consequently, the present bail application stands rejected. 8. However, considering the fact that the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 02.11.2024, the Trial Court is directed to make every endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, without being influenced by any observations made herein on the merits of the case. 9. Let a certified copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai