1 CGHC010315252026 2026:CGHC:41071 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7831 of 2026 • Basanti Pradhan D/o Jaylal Pradhan Aged About 28 Years R/o - Bawai, Tehsil Makdi, P.S. - Makdi, District Kondagaon, C.G. ... Applicant. versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. P.S. Farasgaon, District Kondagaon, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For applicant. : Mr. Akash Mishra, Advocate. For Respondent/State. : Ms. Shailaja Shukla, Govt. Advocate. (Hon'ble Mr. Justicce Narendra Kumar Vyas) Order on Board 21/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of bail as he has been arrested on 24-12-2023 in connection with Crime No.165 of 2025 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 140(1), 103(1) and 238 of BNS, registered at Police Station Farasgaon, District Kondagaon (CG). 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a missing report was lodged by the brother of the deceased Bhagwati and thereafter merg intimation under Section 194 of BNSS was registered as body of 2 unknown person was found near Indrawati river, village Gondiduda on 25-11-2025. On the basis of merg intimation, investigation was carried out and thereafter FIR was registered before the Police Station Kondagaon bearing Crime No. 165 of 2025 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 140(1), 103(1) and 238 of BNS against the other co-accused persons namely Rohit Sotiya, Naresh Pandey and Mrf. Mithlesh Markam and they were arrested during investigastion. Thereafter on the basis of memorandum statement of other co-accused Rolhit Sotiya, name of the present applicant was added in FIR and thereafter present applicant was arrested by the Police and after usual investigation charge sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and ingredients of the alleged offence are not attracted against her. He would further submit that initially the name of the present applicant was not found in FIR and thereafter on the basis of memorandum statement of other co-accused Rohit Sotiya, name of present applicant was recorded which is inadmissible evidence and no other incriminating material for involvement of the applicant with the crime in question has been collected by the prosecution. He would further submit that there is no direct evidence against her., charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in jail since 24-12-2025 and nine months have already been elapsed and would pray for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposing the aforesaid submissions would submit that in the marg intimation and connecting material it is found that the applicant has relation with with the co- accused Rohit Sotiya and she was very much involved in the commission of offence, therefore, she has been arrested and charge sheet has been filed. Lastly she would submit that the credibility of the memorandum statement of other co-accused cannot be considered at this juncture which can be considered while appreciating the evidence and material on recor during trial. Thus, she would pray for rejection of the bail petition. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering the gravity of the offence in which present applicant along with other co-accused was involved in this case and also considering the fact that the incarceration period is not such a long period and also considering, prima facie, material against the appicant in commission of offence, though its credibility can be examined during trial only, I am of the view that it is not a fit case to grant bail to the applicant, at this juncture. 7. Accordingly, the instant MCRC is liable to be and is hereby rejected. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Raju RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Date: 2026.09.21 18:58:10 +0530