1 CGHC010385592026 2026:CGHC:42780 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9287 of 2026 Ankush Choudhary S/o Ashok Choudhary Aged About 28 Years R/o Shiv Chowk, Raja Talab, Raipur, Police Station Civil Lines, Distt- Raipur, (C.G.) --- Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The S H O, Police Station City Kotwali, Balodabazar, Distt- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicant : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Avinash Singh, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 01.10.2026 1. Applicant has filed this Second bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 865/2024 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, Baloda-Bazar (C.G.) for offence punishable under Section 61(2), 103(1), 238 of BNS, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. First bail application of the present applicant was withdrawn vide order dated 22.09.2026 in MCRC No. 8820 of 2026. 2. Case of prosecution in brief is that, on 19.11.2024 a dead body was seen by one Vinod Bhardwaj, who informed this to concerned Police Station. Based upon which, Police reached on spot and, thereafter BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 registered the crime against unknown persons. During investigation, applicant was also arrested on 20.11.2024. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime, he has not committed offence as alleged. He further submits that applicant is made accused only on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused person. He also contended that only seizure of amount of Rs.4,00,000/- would not be circumstantial evidence to implicate the applicant in the instant crime. He submits that out of three criminal antecedent of applicant two are minor offence U/s.294, 323, 506, 34 of I.P.C. and one is of 296, 115 (2), 351 (2), 3 (5) of BNS, which are pending before the jurisdictional Magistrate. He also submits that other co-accused person namely Nisha Shriwas, Himanshu Banjare and Tapasya Kinnar @ Mohd. Imran have been enlarged on bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No. 1463 of 2026 dated 13.02.2026, in M.Cr.C. No. 4361 of 2026 dated 11.05.2026 and in M.Cr.C. No. 6542 of 2025 dated 10.09.2025 respectively. Applicant is in jail since 20.11.2024 and out of total 28 witnesses only 12 have been examined till date. Trial may take some time, hence applicant may also be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and submits that based on the memorandum statement when applicant was arrested, during search Rs.4,00,000/- has been seized from possession of applicant. He submits that in the memorandum statement, other co-accused persons have stated about payment of Rs.6,00,000/- to applicant. However, upon putting specific query as to any other connecting evidence, he 3 submits that in the charge-sheet/case dairy memorandum of statement and seizure of amount is connecting evidence and the case is based on circumstantial evidence. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the bail application. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation, submission of learned counsel for respective parties, period of of detention of applicant and further considering the facts that other co-accused persons in this case have been enlarged on bail and trial is likely to take time for its conclusion, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of ₹ 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (b) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through him counsel. In case of him absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (c) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (d) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Balram