1 CGHC010217242026 2026:CGHC:28682 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5071 of 2026 1 - Yashwant Netam S/o Chaturram Netam Aged About 25 Years R/o Village - Matekeda, Thana - Gaindatola, Tahsil - Chhuriya, Distt - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. Distt Name Wrongly Mention In Page No.9 ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho, Thana - Gaindatola, Distt - Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. .. Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Samir Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 27/2026 registered at Police Station – Gaindatola, District RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 105, 238 and 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, on 01.05.2026, the complainant lodged a First Information Report alleging that his minor son, Bhavesh Mandavi, aged about 13 years, had gone missing from his house during the intervening night of 30.04.2026 and 01.05.2026. It is alleged that the complainant's mother-in-law had last seen the minor in the company of the present applicant, Yashwant Netam, on the evening of 30.04.2026. On the basis of the said allegations, the present crime was registered against the applicant for the alleged commission of the offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the unfortunate death of the minor was purely accidental and there was no intention on the part of the applicant to commit the alleged offence. Learned counsel further submits that a co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by the competent Court and, therefore, the present applicant is also entitled to the benefit of parity. It is further submitted that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 02.05.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Accordingly, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is sufficient material available on record 3 indicating the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have been committed and the material collected during the course of investigation indicating the involvement of the applicant, this Court is of the considered view that, at this stage, no case for grant of bail is made out. Although learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the incident was accidental and has also sought parity with the co-accused, the question whether the occurrence was accidental or otherwise is a matter to be examined during the course of trial. Further, the principle of parity cannot be applied mechanically and must depend upon the role attributed to each accused and the facts and circumstances of the individual case. In the present case, this Court is not persuaded to extend the benefit of parity to the applicant, the bail application of applicant – Yashwant Netam involved in Crime No. 27/2026 registered at Police Station – Gaindatola, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 105, 238 and 3(5) of BNS, is rejected at this stage. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to 4 proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. The Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Ruchi