1 2026:CGHC:19545 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3844 of 2026 1 - Somprakash Dewangan S/o Kanhaiya Lal Dewangan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Village Kurra, Police Station Bhakhara District Dhamtari C.G. ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer Police Of Police Station- Arjuni District -Dhamtari C.G. ... Respondent For the applicant : Mr. Anil Kumar Gulati, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anish Tiwari, Dy.Government Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 28.04.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant in Crime No.126/2025 registered at Police Station Arjuni, District Dhamtari (CG) for the offences under Sections 103(1), 309(6), 310(3), 331(8), 238, 49, 61 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution case on 01.09.2025 in the night at 2 O’ clock, five accused namely Dhan Raj, Hem Sagar, Upendra, Chetan Sahu and Kuleshwar Sahu entered the house of complainant to commit robbery and when the said act was SOURABH PATEL Digitally signed by SOURABH PATEL Date: 2026.04.28 14:47:26 +0530 2 resisted by the complainants’ husband Krit Ram Sahu, three accused have brutally assaulted him, due to which, Krit Ram died on the spot. Subsequently the FIR was lodged by the wife of deceased. During investigation, the police recorded the memorandum statement of one of the accused persons, namely Dhanraj Yadav. Based on the memorandum statement of Dhanraj Yadav, the present applicant was arrested by the police on the ground that the applicant was one of the conspirators, as he had informed the other accused persons that the person residing at Amdi turn had a large sum of money in his house. This information was allegedly conveyed by the applicant to Sahdev. On the basis of the applicant's memorandum statement, a mobile phone was seized. During the course of the investigation, the applicant and other co-accused persons were arrested for the commission of the alleged offences. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation against the present applicant is that he informed the other accused persons that the person residing at Amdi turn had a large sum of money in his house. Except for this, there is no incriminating evidence available to connect the present applicant with the crime in question. He further submits that neither any of the stolen articles nor the weapon of offence was seized from the applicant. He next submits that the applicant was not present at the place of incident and has been falsely implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of a co-accused person. The applicant is in jail since 04.09.2025; till date out of a total 20 witnesses, only 11 have been examined 3 and there is no immediate possibility of disposal of case, therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is the main conspirator in the present case, as he played a vital role by informing the other accused that a large sum of money was in the house of the deceased and by assisting the other main accused in the commission of the crime. He further submits that a mobile phone was seized from the applicant and there is one criminal antecedent against the applicant under the Gambling Act, therefore, at this stage, the applicant should not be released on bail. 5. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the fact fact neither any stolen article nor any weapon of offence was seized from the present applicant and further looking to the nature of allegation levelled against him and the applicant is in jail since 04.09.2025, the trial is likely to take time, without observing anything on the merits of the case I am inclined to release the applicant on regular bail. 6. Accordingly, this bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the said Court on each and every date as may be directed in that behalf. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Sourabh P.