1 CGHC010339852026 2026:CGHC:41157 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8243 of 2026 Ram Kumar Patanwar S/o Lt. Devnarayan Patanwar Aged About 40 Years R/o Bandhwapar, Sarkanda, Police Station- Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Civil Line, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Shri Abhipreet Bajpai, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Shri Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Deputy G.A. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY) Order on Board 22/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.843/2026, registered at Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340, 61(2) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a written report was lodged by Naib Nazir Grade-II posted in the Office of Tehsildar, Bilaspur to the effect that the present applicant in collusion with other persons had deliberately concealed the actual cause of death and on the pretext of Government’s snake bite/poisonous animal bite, obtained financial Digitally signed by ALLENA ANJANI KUMAR Date: 2026.09.23 10:37:53 +0530 2 assistance of Rs.4,00,000/- dishonestly by fraudulent means and thereby caused loss to the State Exchequer. On such report, the police registered the offences against the present applicant, as stated above. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that at the relevant time, the applicant was posted as Home Guard Security person at C.I.M.S. and there was no criminal antecedent against the applicant. He would submit that he was not involved in the commission of crime at all. It is also contended that in the same crime number, co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail. It is also argued that the investigation has already been completed and the applicant is in jail since 21.07.2026 and trial may take some time for its conclusion . Therefore, he would pray for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application and submit that there are serious allegations against the present applicant, therefore, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the fact that the applicant was posted as Home Guard Security personnel in C.I.M.S. at relevant time, he was directly not involved in the commission of crime, charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant is in jail since 21.07.2026 and that, co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail and further that, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case and 3 the bail application is accordingly allowed. 7. Let the applicant be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with 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 from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to 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 disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Anjani