1 CGHC010233662026 2026:CGHC:40623 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6058 of 2026 * - Shubham Dewangan @ Raja S/o Ram Singh Dewangan Aged About 22 Years R/o Shakti Nagar Behind Manas Bhawan Police Station Mohan Nagar District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant Versus * - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O Police Station Mohan Nagar District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 17/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as he is in jail since 17.02.2026 in connection with Crime No. 134/2026 registered in Police Station – Mohan Nagar, District Durg (CG) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 103, 3(5) & 191(2) of BNS and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act. 2. As per prosecution story, an F.I.R. was lodged by Shiv Kumar Gond, father of the deceased on 16.02.2026 to the effect that he was informed by one Dhanesh Gond that Karan @ Batha, Ashwini, Paadu and their associates have assaulted his younger son namely Kshay @ Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.09.17 19:50:25 +0530 2 Nanu. It is also intimated that Kshay @ Nanu was taken to hospital and during course of treatment, he died. On the basis of said F.I.R., offences punishable under Section 103 and 3(5) of BNS were registered against Karan @ Batha, Ashwini, Paadu and others. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R. He would contend that the witnesses in their statements recorded under Section 180 BNSS and in memorandum statements of accused persons applicant has not been named. He would further contend that on basis of suspicion, the present applicant has been implicated in the case. It is also submitted that charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 17.02.2026. Thus, he would pray to release the applicant on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose. He would submit that there is involvement of the present applicant in commission of offence. He contend that the bail application of the present applicant deserves to be dismissed. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the fact that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R.; his name does not appear in the statements under Section 180 of BNS and memorandum statements of the accused persons; without any sufficient material, he has been implicated in the case. Further charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 17.02.2026 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, without 3 expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. 7. It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- I. He shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such fact to the Court; II. He shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial; III. He shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till the disposal of the trial; and, IV. He shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature in future. 8. The observation made in the course of this order is only for considering the case of the applicant on the application for the grant of regular bail. The concerned trial Court shall not be influenced or bound by any observation made in the course of this order. 9. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti