1 CGHC010127082026 2026:CGHC:42106 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3524 of 2026 1 - Amardeep Patre S/o Munshi Patre Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Tora Bhatapara P.S. Simga District- Baloadabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Simga District- Baloadabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Prakash Mishra, Advocate along with Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr.Jitendra Shrivastava, GA Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 28.09.2026 1) This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 360/2025, registered at Police Station Simga, District Baloda-Bazar, Bhatapara (C.G.) for alleged commission of offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 191(2), 191(3), 109(1), 103(1) and 61(2) of BNS. 2 2) The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 04.07.2025 at about 8:00 p.m., the deceased Tamraj Mahipal was allegedly abused and assaulted by the present applicant, Sunil Patre and their associates with hands, sticks and sharp-edged weapons, particularly targeting his head and chest. On the basis of the report, an FIR was registered against the accused persons, including the present applicant, who was subsequently arrested. Hence, the present bail application. 3) Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 05.07.2025 and the charge-sheet has already been filed. He would contend that co- accused, namely Ompriy Chaturvedi, has been enlarged on bail in MCRC No.10324 of 2025 vide order dated 15.12.2025 and, therefore, the applicant is entitled to the grant of bail. 4) On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the co-accused namely, Ompriy Chaturvedi was granted bail as his name was not mentioned in the FIR and only omnibus allegations were levelled against him. He would contend that the present applicant was specifically named in the FIR and the weapon allegedly used in the commission of the murder of Tamraj Mahipal was seized from his possession. Therefore, considering the specific allegations and the recovery of the weapon from the present applicant, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 3 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6) Having considered the fact that the present applicant was specifically named in the FIR, the weapon allegedly used in the commission of the murder of Tamraj Mahipal was seized from his possession, and the co- accused, namely Ompriy Chaturvedi, was granted bail on the ground that his name was not mentioned in the FIR and only omnibus allegations were levelled against him, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant cannot claim parity with said co- accused. Therefore, no case for grant of bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Rekha