1 2026:CGHC:18419 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2240 of 2026 1 - Sheshmal Markam S/o Chaitram Markam Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Lajoda, P.S. - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Ghasiya @ Fagnu Markam S/o Hayti Markam Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Lajoda, P.S. - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Jugdhar Markam S/o Jethuram Markam Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Lajoda, P.S. - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Suklal Markam S/o Sukman Markam Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Lajoda, P.S. - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Somaru Markam S/o Sukdu Markam Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Lajoda, P.S. - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Mangalsay Netam S/o Ramdhar Netam Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Lajoda, P.S. - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Chaitram Markam S/o Kotel Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Lajoda, P.S. - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station, Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Abhishek Nirala, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 22.04.2026 RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 41/2026 registered at Police Station - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 325, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 4, 5, 6 & 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004. 2. Case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that on 02.02.2026, Mukesh Soni, City Coordinator of Bajrang Dal, District Unit Kondagaon, lodged a written complaint at Police Station Kondagaon stating that on 01.02.2026, upon receiving certain information, he along with others reached the spot and allegedly found 10–12 persons slaughtering a bull and cooking its meat; upon seeing them, the said persons fled from the spot, however, one Fagnuram Hayti was apprehended. It is further alleged that the bull had been cut into pieces using sharp-edged weapons, the meat was packed for the purpose of sale, and the remains, including ear tag No. 102235/131420, were recovered from the spot. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, an FIR was registered and the present applicants were arrested. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants have been falsely implicated by the concerned Police Station and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. It is further submitted that no incriminating material has 3 been recovered from the conscious possession of the applicants and the alleged recovery is planted and doubtful in nature. It is further submitted that the mandatory provisions of search and seizure as prescribed under law have not been complied with, thereby vitiating the alleged recovery. It is further submitted that no proper veterinary examination report or FSL report is available on record to conclusively establish that the seized substance belongs to prohibited cattle. It is further submitted that there is no material available on record to show that the applicants were engaged in any illegal slaughter or commercial activity. It is further submitted that the alleged FIR has been lodged merely on the basis of a memorandum statement without any independent corroboration or preliminary verification and the entire prosecution case rests upon such memorandum which has no substantive evidentiary value and there is no direct evidence connecting the applicants with the alleged offence. He also submits that the applicants have no criminal antecedents, and they are in jail since 02.02.2026, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. She further submits that on the basis of the complaint lodged by Mukesh Soni, it has come on record that 10–12 persons were found slaughtering a bull and preparing its meat for sale, and upon arrival of the complainant and 4 others, the accused persons fled from the spot, out of which one co- accused, namely Fagnuram Hayti, was apprehended. It is further submitted that the bull had been cut into pieces with sharp-edged weapons and the remains, including the ear tag, were recovered from the spot, which prima facie establishes the commission of the offence. Therefore, they are not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, though it is alleged that the accused persons were involved in slaughtering a bull and preparing its meat for sale, but no incriminating material has been recovered from their conscious possession, further the applicants have no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, they are in jail since 02.02.2026 and trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, accordingly, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed. Let the Applicants – Sheshmal Markam, Ghasiya @ Fagnu Markam, Jugdhar Markam, Suklal Markam, Somaru Markam, Mangalsay Netam and Chaitram Markam, involved in Crime No. 41/2026 registered at Police Station - Kondagaon, District - Kondagaon, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 325, 5 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 4, 5, 6 & 10 of the Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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. (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants shall remain present, in person, 6 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan