Chattisgarh High Court
Mohan Banjare vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 29 January, 2025
Author: Narendra Kumar Vyas
Bench: Narendra Kumar Vyas
1
2025:CGHC:5413
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8118 of 2024
• Jitendra Banjara S/o Brijlal Banjara Aged About 41 Years R/o Rama
Valley, Police Station Chakarbhata, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.
--- Applicant
versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
City Kotwali Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh.
--- Respondent
MCRC No. 8264 of 2024
• Dinesh Kumar S/o Sukalu Ram Aged About 34 Years R/o Raman
Tola, Machewabhatha, Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund,
Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police
Station City Kotwali Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara,
Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8760 of 2024
• Dinesh Chaturvedi S/o Jeevan Lal Chaturvedi Aged About 38 Years
R/o Village Sankara, P.S. Berla, District – Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. City
Kotwali, District Balodabazar – Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
Digitally
signed by
MANISH
MANISH YADAV
YADAV Date:
2025.01.30
18:06:51
+0530
2
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8990 of 2024
1. Hemant Banjare S/o Panchram Banjare Aged About 29 Years R/o
Dhaurabhatta, P.S. Saja, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh
2. Dinesh Chaturvedi S/o Jeevan Lal Chaturvedi Aged About 38 Years
R/o Village Sankra, P.S. Berla, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh
— Applicants
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. City
Kotwali, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 9043 of 2024
1. Rekhram Sonwani S/o Mangaldas Sonwani Aged About 28 Years
Rampura, P.S. Saja District – Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.
2. Dinesh Chaturvedi S/o Jeevan Lal Chaturvedi, Aged About 38 Years
R/o Village Sankra, P.S. Berla, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.
— Applicants
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. City
Kotwali, District Balodabazar – Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8762 of 2024
• Dinesh Chaturvedi S/o Jeevan Lal Chaturvedi, Aged About 38 Years
R/o Village Sankra, P.S. Berla, District – Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. City
Kotwali, District – Balodabazar -Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 9092 of 2024
• Hemant Banjare S/o Panchram Banjare Aged About 29 Years
Dhaurabhatta P.S. Saja District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.
3
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. City
Kotwali, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 9120 of 2024
1. Rekhram Sonwani S/o Mangaldas Sonwani Aged About 28 Years
Rampura, P.S. Saja District- Bemetara, Chhattisgarh
2. Dinesh Chaturvedi S/o Jeevan Lal Chaturvedi Aged About 38 Years
R/o Village Sankra, P.S. Berla, District- Bemetara, Chhattisgarh
— Applicants
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. City
Kotwali, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 681 of 2025
• Tilak Dhritlahre S/o Vijay Dhritlahre Aged About 26 Years R/o
Mudiyadih P.S. City Kotwali Balodabazar- Balodabazar- Bhatapara
(C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S.- City
Kotwali Balodabazar- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.)
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7613 of 2024
• Shailendra Banjare S/o Ramesh Banjare Aged About 33 Years R/o
Panchshil Nagar Balodabazar, P.S. City Kotwali, Balodabazar,
District Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Balodabazar, District Balodabazar,
Chhattisgarh
4
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7627 of 2024
• Shailendra Banjare S/o Ramesh Banjare Aged About 33 Years R/o
Panchshil Nagar Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar,
Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7628 of 2024
• Shailendra Banjare S/o Ramesh Banjare Aged About 33 Years R/o
Panchshil Nagar Balodabazar, P.S. City Kotwali, Balodabazar,
District Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Balodabazar, District Balodabazar,
Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7716 of 2024
• Shailendra Banjare S/o Rameh Banjare, Aged About 33 Years R/o
Panchshil Nagar Balodabazar, P.S City Kotwali , Balodabazar, Dist-
Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh R/o Through Station House Officer P.S . City
Kotwali , Balodabazar, Dist- Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7744 of 2024
• Shailendra Banjare S/o Ramesh Banjare Aged About 33 Years R/o
Panchshil Nagar Balodabazar, P.S. City Kotwali, Balodabazar,
District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh (In Jail)
5
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer P.S. City
Kotwali, Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara,
Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8471 of 2024
• Brijesh Kumar S/o Jageshwar Ratre Aged About 26 Years R/o
Sonbarsa Para, Ward No. 09, Piparsati, District Janjgir-Champa
(C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station City Kotwali, District
Balodabazar – Bhatapara (C.G.)
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7641 of 2024
• Jitendra Banjara S/o Brijlal Banjara Aged About 41 Years R/o Rama
Valley (Wrongly Mention Ramwaili), Police Station – Chakarbhata,
District – Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
– City Kotwali Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7651 of 2024
• Jitendra Banjara S/o Brijlal Banjara Aged About 41 Years R/o Rama
Valley (Wrongly Mention Ramwaili), Police Station – Chakarbhata,
District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
6
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
– City Kotwali Baloda Bazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara,
Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7947 of 2024
• Mohan Banjare S/o Dashrath Banjare Aged About 51 Years R/o
Harinbhattha, Ps. Gidhpur, District Balodabazar – Bhatapara,
Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police
Station- City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar –
Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7949 of 2024
• Mohan Banjare S/o Dashrath Banjare Agjed About 51 Years R/o
Harinbhattha, Ps Gidhpur, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7963 of 2024
• Mohan Banjare S/o Dashrath Banjare Aged About 51 Years R/o
Harinbhattha, P.S. Gidhpur, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara,
Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
City Kotwali,j Balodabazar, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara,
Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
7
MCRC No. 7968 of 2024
• Mohan Banjare S/o Dashrath Banjare Aged About 51 Years R/o
Harinbhattha, Ps. Gidhpuri District Balodabazar-Bhatapara
(Chhattisgarh)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police
Station- City Kotwali Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara
(Chhattisgarh)
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7973 of 2024
• Mohan Banjare S/o Dashrath Banjare Aged About 51 Years R/o
Harinbhattha, Ps Gidhpuri, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7983 of 2024
• Mohan Banjare S/o Dashrath Banjare Aged About 51 Years R/o
Harinbhattha, Ps Gidhpur, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
City Kotwali Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7987 of 2024
• Mohan Banjare S/o Dashrath Banjare Aged About 51 Years R/o
Harinbhattha, P.S. Gidhpuri District Balodabazar Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
8
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
City Kotwali Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara
Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7954 of 2024
• Jitendra Banjara S/o Brijlal Banjara Aged About 41 Years R/o Rama
Valley, Police Station- Chakarbhata, District- Bilaspur, C.G. (In Jail)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through – Station House Officer, Police
Station – City Kotwali Baloda Bazar, – District – Baloda Bazar
Bhatapara, C.G.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7961 of 2024
• Dinesh Kumar S/o Sukalu Ram, Aged About 34 Years R/o Raman
Tola, Machewabhatha, Mahasamund, District – Mahasamund (C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through – Station House Officer, Police
Station City Kotwali Balodabazar, District- Balodabazar Bhatapara
(C.G.)
— Respondent
MCRC No. 7974 of 2024
• Dinesh Kumar S/o Sukalu Ram, Aged About 34 Years R/o Raman
Tola, Machewabhatha, Mahasamund, District-Mahasamund (C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh, Through- Station House Officer, Police
Station-City Kotwali, Balodabazar, District-Balodabazar-Bhatapara
(C.G.)
— Respondent
9
MCRC No. 8350 of 2024
• Narendra Dahariya S/o Pilu Ram Dahariya Aged About 35 Years
R/o Kari, Police Station- Lawan, District- Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police
Station- City Kotwali, Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8365 of 2024
• Narendra Dahariya S/o Pilu Ram Dahariya, Aged About 35 Years
R/o Kari, Police Station- Lawan, District- Balodabazar (C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police
Station- City Kotwali, Balodabazar (C.G.)
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8388 of 2024
• Narendra Dahariya S/o Pilu Ram Dahariya Aged About 35 Years
R/o Kari, Police Station Bhatapara, Lawan, District – Balodabazar,
Chhattisgarh.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police
Station – City Kotwali, Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8392 of 2024
• Narendra Dahariya S/o Pilu Ram Dahariya Aged About 35 Years
Resident Of Kari, Police Station- Lawan, Distt- Balodabazar
(Chhattisgarh)
— Applicant
Versus
10
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police
Station- City Kotwali Balodabazar (Chhattisgarh)
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8395 of 2024
• Narendra Dahariya S/o Pilu Ram Dahariya Aged About 35 Years
Resident Of Kari, Police Station Lawan, District- Balodabazar-
Bhatapara Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through-The Station House Officer, Police
Station City Kotwali Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8011 of 2024
• Vijay Kumar S/o Lt. Heeralalbanjare Aged About 44 Years R/o
Kanharpuri, Police Station Bhimkhoj, Mahasamund, District-
Mahasamund, C.G. (In Jail)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police
Station- Balodabazar, District Balodabazar, C.G.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8034 of 2024
• Vijay Kumar S/o Lt. Heeralal Banjare Aged About 33 Years R/o
Kanharpuri, Police Station Bhimkhoj, Mahasamund, District
Mahasamund (C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Balodabazar, District Balodabazar (C.G.)
— Respondent
11
MCRC No. 8037 of 2024
• Sanjay Sarang S/o Baliram Sarang Aged About 49 Years R/o
Village – Nakti Post – Mandir Hasaud Thana Mana Camp Raipur
District – Raipur Chhattisgarh
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Police Station Balodabazaar District
Balodabazaar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8440 of 2024
• Hemant Sang S/o Late Dhansay Sang Aged About 50 Years R/o
Rawanbhata In Front Of Police Line Gariyaband District –
Gariyaband (C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Balodabazar District –
Balodabazar – Bhatapara (C.G.)
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8182 of 2024
• Jitendra Banjara S/o Brijlal Banjara Aged About 41 Years R/o Rama
Valley Police Station Chakarbhata District – Bilaspur (C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station
City Kotwali Balodabazar District – Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.)
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8764 of 2024
• Dinesh Chaturvedi S/o Jeevan Lal Chaturvedi Aged About 38 Years
R/o Village Sankra, P.S. Berla, District Bemetara Cg
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. City
Kotwali, District Balodabazar Bhatapara CG
12
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8879 of 2024
• Jitendra Banjara S/o Brijlal Banjara Aged About 41 Years R/o Rama
Valley (Wrongly Mention Ramwaili), Police Station- Chakarbhata,
District- Bilaspur, C.G.
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police
Station- City Kotwali Baloda Bazar,- District- Baloda Bazar-
Bhatapar, C.G.
— Respondent
MCRC No. 8880 of 2024
• Jitendra Banjara S/o Brijlal Banjara Aged About 41 Years R/o Rama
Valley (Wrogly Mention Ramvaili), Police Station-City
Chakarbhatha, District – Bilaspur (C.G.)
— Applicant
Versus
• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
– City Kotwali Baloda Bazar, District – Baloda Bazar Bhatapara
(C.G.)
— Respondent
For Applicants : Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate
alongwith Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Ms.
Sakshi Chhabra and Suresh Tandan, Ms.
Hamida Siddiqui appears through video
conferencing, Mr. Harshwardhan Parganiha
with Ms. Saloni Verma, Mr. Aseem Bhagwat
Gopal, Mr. Satya Prakash Verma with Ms.
Ritika Verma, Mr. S.C. Verma, Sr. Advocate
alongwith Mr. Manharan Lal Sahu, Mr.
Sanjay Agrawal, Mr. Aishwarya Kumar
Dubey, Advocates
For Respondent/State : Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Dy. Advocate General
Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Order on Board
13
29.01.2025
1. Since the applicants have been arrested in the same incident, but total 13
different crime numbers have been registered against them and also
charged for the same offence, they are heard analogously and their bail
applications are being disposed of by this common order. The details of
MCRC number, Name of the accused, Crime No., offence for which they
are charge-sheeted and their date of incarceration are given in the
tabulation form as under:
Case No. Name of Crime Offence under Section Date of
Applicant/ No. incarceratio
Accused n
382 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/8118/2024 Jitendra 13.06.2024
/2024 353, 332, 186, 341, 120-
Banjara
B, 307 of IPC and Sec. 3
& 4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
384 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8264/2024 Dinesh 15.07.204
/2024 353, 332, 435, 427, 120-
Kumar
B, 307, 440 of IPC, Sec.
25 and 27 of Arms Act
and Sec. 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
378/ Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8760/2024 Dinesh 15.07.2024
2024 353, 332, 435, 120-B, of
Chaturvedi
IPC & 3 & 4 of Prevention
of Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
377 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8990/2024 1. Hemant 15.07.2024
/2024 353, 332, 435, 307, 396,
Banjare
120-B, of IPC & 3 & 4 of
2. Dinesh Prevention of Damage of
Chaturvedi Public Propety Act, 1984
380 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/9043/2024 1. Rekhram 16.07.2024
/2024 294, 353, 332, 435, 307,
Sonwani &
427, 436, 440, 120-B, of
15.07.2024
2. Dinesh IPC & 3 & 4 of Prevention
Chaturvedi of Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
382 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/8762/2024 Dinesh 15.07.2024
/2024 341, 186, 353, 332, 307,
Chaturvedi
427, 440, 120-B, of IPC &
3 & 4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
384 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/9092/2024 Hemant 15.07.2024
/2024 353, 332, 435, 307, 427,
Banjare
120-B, of IPC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
14
Public Propety Act, 1984
and Sec. 25 & 27 of Arms
Act
389 Sec. 436, 147, 149, 278,
MCRC/9120/2024 1. Rekhram 16.07.2024
/2024 186, 440 of IPC & 3 & 4
Sonwani
of Prevention of Damage
2. Dinesh of Public Propety Act,
Chaturvedi 1984 and Sec. 25 & 25(a)
of Indian Telegraph Act,
382 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 353,
MCRC/681/2025 Tilak 31.07.2024
/2024 332, 294, 186, 341, 120-
Dhritlahare
B, 427, 307 of IPC
377 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7613/2024 Shailendra 12.08.2024
/2024 353, 332, 307, 435, 440,
Banjare
395, s120-B, of IPC & 3
& 4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
378 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7627/2024 Shailendra 07.08.2024
/2024 353, 332, 395, 307, 435,
Banjare
440, 120-B, of IPC & 3 &
4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
382 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7628/2024 Shailendra 06.07.2024
/2024 353, 332, 307, 341, 427,
Banjare
435, 440, 395, s120-B, of
IPC & 3 & 4 of Prevention
of Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
379 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/7716/2024 Shailendra 12.08.2024
/2024 506, 335, 186, 332, 307,
Banjare
435, 436, 120-B, of IPC &
3 & 4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
380 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/7744/2024 Shailendra 12.08.2024
/2024 506, 335, 186, 332, 307,
Banjare
427, 435, 436, 120-B, of
IPC & 3 & 4 of Prevention
of Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
380 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/8471/2024 Brijesh 13.06.2024
/2024 186, 332, 307, 427, 435,
Kumar
120-B, of IPC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
393 436, 147, 148, 149 of IPC
MCRC/7641/2024 Jitendra 11.07.2024
/2024
Banjara
381 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/7651/2024 Jitendra 11.07.2024
/2024 506, 186, 332, 353, 307,
Banjare
120-B, of IPC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
379 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/7947/2024 Mohan 15.07.2024
/2024 506, 335, 186, 332, 307,
Banjare
427, 435, 436, 120-B of
IPC & 3 & 4 of Prevention
15
of Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
378 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7649/2024 Mohan 15.07.2024
/2024 353, 332, 333, 307, 435,
Banjare
440, 120-B of IPC & 3 &
4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
377 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7963/2024 Mohan 15.07.2024
/2024 353, 332, 307, 427, 120-
Banjare
B of IpsC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
380 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7968/2024 Mohan 15.07.2024
/2024 332, 294, 307, 353, 427,
Banjare
435, 120-B of IPC & 3 &
4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
389 Sec. 436, 147, 149, 278,
MCRC/7973/2024 Mohan 15.07.2024
/2024 186, 440 of IPC & 3 & 4
Banjare
of Prevention of Damage
of Public Propety Act,
1984
386 Sec. 153A, 505(1),
MCRC/7983/2024 Mohan 15.07.2024
/2024 505(1)(B), 505(1)(C),
Banjare
109, 120(B), 147, 148,
149, 186, 353, 332, 333,
307, 435, 436, 341, 427
of IPC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
381 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 506,
MCRC/7987/2024 Mohan 15.07.2024
/2024 186, 332, 294, 307, 353,
Banjare
435, 120-B of IPC & 3 &
4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
377 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7954/2024 Jitendra 16.06.2024
/2024 307, 353, 427, 120-B of
Banjara
IPC & 3 & 4 of Prevention
of Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
379 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7961/2024 Dinesh 15.07.2024
/2024 332, 294, 307, 506, 333,
Kumar
427, 395, 397, 353, 427,
435, 436, 120-B of IPC &
3 & 4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984, Sec. 2
of Prevention of Insults to
National Honour Act,
1971
377 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/7974/2024 Dinesh 15.07.2024
/2024 332, 307, 353, 427, 120-
Kumar
B of IPC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
16
377 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8350/2024 Narendra 26.06.2024
/2024 332, 440, 435, 307, 395,
Dahariya
120-B of IPC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
378 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8365/2024 Narendra 26.06.2024
/2024 353, 332, 435, 307, 395,
Dahariya
120-B of IPC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
389 Sec. 436, 147, 149, 278,
MCRC/8388/2024 Narendra 26.06.2024
/2024 186, 440, of IPC & 3 & 4
Dahariya
of Prevention of Damage
of Public Propety Act,
1984 and 25 & 25A of the
Indian Telegraph Act
380 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8392/2024 Narendra 26.06.2024
/2024 294, 332, 333, 353, 427,
Dahariya
440, 435, 307, 436, 120-
B of IPC & 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
381 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/8395/2024 Narendra 26.06.2024
/2024 506, 186, 332, 353, 435,
Dahariya
307, 120-B of IPC & 3 &
4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
384 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8011/2024 Vijay Kumar 15.07.2024
/2024 353, 332, 440, 435, 427,
307, 120-B of IPC & 3 &
4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984 and
Sec. 25 & 27 of Arms Act
379 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8034/2024 Vijay Kumar 15.07.2024
/2024 353, 332, 435, 436, 307,
294, 506, 333, 427, 395,
297, 120-B of IPC & Sec.
3 & 4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984 and
Sec. 02 of the Prevention
of Insults to the National
Honour, 1971
377 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8037/2024 Sanjay 16.06.2024
/2024 353, 332, 307, 427, 120-
Sarang
B of IPC & Sec. 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
377 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8440/2024 Hemant 13.06.2024
/2024 353, 332, 307, 427, 120-
Sang
B of IPC & Sec. 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
383 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8182/2024 Jitendra 13.06.2024
/2024 332, 353, 440, 435, 436,
Banjara
427, 307, 120-B of IPC &
Sec. 3 & 4 of Prevention
17
of Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
381 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 294,
MCRC/8764/2024 Dinesh 22.07.2024
/2024 506, 186, 332, 353, 435,
Chaturvedi
307, 427, 440, 120-B of
IPC and Sec. 3 & 4 of
Prevention of Damage of
Public Propety Act, 1984
384 Sec. 147, 148, 149, 186,
MCRC/8879/2024 Jitendra 03.08.2024
/2024 332, 353, 440, 435, 427,
Banjara
307, 120-B of IPC & Sec.
3 & 4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984 and
Sec. 25 & 27 of Arms Act
378 Sec. 147, 148, 186, 332,
MCRC/8880/2024 Jitendra 03.08.2024
/2024 353, 440, 435, 307, 395,
Banjara
120-B of IPC & Sec. 3 &
4 of Prevention of
Damage of Public
Propety Act, 1984
2. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under
Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have
been arrested on various dates as mentioned in the table in
connection with Crime No. 384/2024, registered at Police Station
City Kotwali Balodabazar, District – Balodabazar (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 120B, 147, 148, 149, 186, 353,
332, 435, 427, 307, 440 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Prevention
of Damage to Public Property Act (PDPPA), 1984 & Sections 25 and
27 of Arms Act.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the present complainant-
Deputy Superintendent of Police has lodged a complaint on
13.06.2024 before Police Station- City Kotwali, Baloda-Bazar
alleging that some persons belonging to Satnami Samaj have
committed incident of assault, vandalism and arson on 10.06.2024
on the pretext that on 15/16th May, 2024 at Village- Mahakoni, Police
Station- Amargupha, Giroudpuri, a monument of Satnami Samaj
was damaged and loss to the said property was done, therefore,
18
Crime No. 105/2024 for commission of offence under Section 295,
34 of IPC was registered on 17.05.2024. The police after
investigation have submitted charge-sheet against Sultu Kumar
Yadav & two others before the learned Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Kasdol, District- Baloda-Bazar. Thereafter the President of
Satnami Samaj Chhattisgarh and other office bearers including
office bearers of political parties have submitted an application on
30.05.2024 wherein permission to conduct the conference of the
community was sought, to conduct CBI enquiry was demanded. It
was also decided that by conducting congregate between 3-4 p.m. a
memo has to be handed over to the Collector- Balodabazar, wherein
10 persons were authorized to meet the Collector which was
allowed with certain conditions. Thereafter, a meeting was also
organized in the office of Joint Collector, Balodabazar on 07.06.2024
wherein it was also agreed by the Satanami Samaj that they will
conduct the congregate in a peaceful manner without disturbing the
peace and tranquility of the area. Accordingly, the permission was
granted on the conditions of maintaining peace and tranquility.
Thereafter, the congregate was started on 10.06.2024 at 11 a.m.
where the administration deployed police persons to maintain the
law and order. All of a sudden, at about 2.30 – 6.00 p.m. the
congregate started stone pelting at office of Superintendent of
Police, District Panchayat, Tahsil office and caused damage to the
property and official records were also damaged. Accordingly, FIR
was registered. In the incident, 134 motorcycles, 29 four wheeler
vehicles and 1 fire brigade, 17 government vehicles, 12 government
19
four wheeler vehicles were damaged causing loss of total Rs. 2.82
crores.
4. This Court has directed the State to file an affidavit explaining how
much loss to the public exchequer has been caused by the action of
the accused persons and also to produce the video of procession to
demonstrate how many persons assembled on the spot. In
pursuance of direction given by this Court, the State has filed
affidavit of Inspector, Cyber Cell, Balodabazar, District-
Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) wherein he has stated in paragraph
19 of the affidavit as under :-
“19. It is respectfully submitted that due to the criminal
conspiracy of the applicants, the supporters of the
applicants along with agitators damaged the loss of public
at large. It is further submitted that overall damages in all 13
FIRs, is estimated 10,21,00,000/- (Rs. Ten Crores Twenty
One Lakhs).”
5. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants
have been falsely implicated only because they are members of
Satnami caste and the applicants have been arrested only on
grounds of suspicion since the FIR was lodged against unknown
offenders. Memorandum statement of applicants were recorded and
seizure of stones and a stick have been shown in the challan
against the present applicants. However, no seizure has been
actually made from the present applicants and entire matter is
cooked up. No documents or evidence has been placed in final
report to show that the present applicants were actively participating
in committing the alleged crime. They would further submit that
there is no direct and substantial evidence against the present
applicants in the entire charge-sheet. The incident took place on
20
10.06.2024 and the applicants were arrested on the dateds
mentioned above. They would further submit that the TIP has been
done in violation of the norms required under the law for
identification parade as such, involvement of the applicants for the
aforesaid offence is illegal. They would further submit that from the
basis of materials so collected by the prosecution under Section 307
of the IPC cannot be made out. They would further submit that
except this section, all the sections are triable by the Magistrate.
The medical document itself suggests that the injuries inflicted were
not grievous as per the medical documents annnexed with charge
sheet. They would further submit that the only incriminating
documents available against the present applicant are: i. Seizure
memo, ii. Test Identification Parade (hereinafter referred to as “TIP”)
and he would submit that both the above documents are apparently
faulty. They would further submit that nature and gravity of offence
alone cannot be the sole ground for rejection of bail.
6. They would further submit that there is no chance of absconding,
chance of influencing the witnesses. Lastly they would submit that
the investigation has been completed, charge-sheet has been filed
and they are in jail for more than 6-7 months. It has also been
contended that other co-accused Narayan Miri whose bail
application was rejected by this Court have preferred Special Leave
to Appeal (Criminal) No. 14169/2024 and the Hon’ble Supreme
Court vide its order dated 24.01.2025 has granted the bail to the co-
accused. The operative part of the order is as under:
“Considering the period of incarceration of the petitioner
and the entire facts and circumstances of this case, we are
21of the opinion that a case of bail is made out for the
petitioner and therefore, the prayer for bail is allowed.
Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail
forthwith on the usual terms and conditions to be decided
by the concerned court.”
7. Thus, they would submit that they are also entitled for bail on the
ground of parity and long incarceration period, completion of
investigation against them and no custodial remand is required as
the charge-sheet has already been submitted.
8. On the other hand learned State counsel vehemently objected the
submission of the learned counsel for the applicants and would
submit that after registration of the FIR sufficient material has been
collected by the prosecution and the statements of the witnesses
were recorded. He would further submit that the applicants have
been identified by the complainant and the mobile record of the
applicants also suggest their presence at the place of occurrence,
Thus, he would submit that there was involvement of the applicants
in the commission of crime, therefore, he would pray for rejection of
the bail.
9. Learned State counsel would submit that the present case relates to
the large scale violence and fire incident which took place in the
Balodabazar- Bhatapara district and it is a rare occurrence of such a
large scale of violence in the State of Chhattisgarh which has
caused damage of Government and public property to an estimated
amount is 4,03,950/-. He would further submit that in all 13 FIRs
have been registered by the incident committed by the same mob at
different places at Baloda Bazar District which is not a big district, is
estimated to Rs.10,21,00,000/- (Rs. Ten Crores Twenty One Lakhs).
22
10. He would further submit that the accused persons have acted in
furtherance of the criminal conspiracy and have committed the
offence of rioting, used criminal force, assaulted the public servants
to prohibit them from discharging their duties, by obstructing the
public way they have caused wrongful confinement, caused
damages to the property, set fire the buildings and vehicles, and
attacked the Police Officers.
11. He would further submit that the serious allegations have been
leveled regarding the involvement of the present applicants in the
violence and agitation which ultimately resulted in destruction of
Public Property and public building at a large scale; wherein at the
Collectorate building more than 257 vehicles have been burnt,
including the vehicles owned by Government officers, 3 fire
extinguisher vehicles and many vehicles belonging to general public
have also been burnt during the incident. It would be pertinent to
mention here that the vehicles of one of the judicial officer of the
Family Court has also been burnt for which a different F.I.R. has
been registered. Looking to the nature and gravity of the offence
which resulted in destroying the peace & rule of law of the entire
State as well as the role of the applicants in provoking the riots and
the role in causing damage to the public property, their bail
applications may kindly be rejected.
12. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the diary and
considering the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case
of Narayan Miri (Supra).
13. Considering the fact that the applicants are in incarceration for 6-7
months, charge-sheet has already been filed and trial may take
23
some time, I am of the view that a case of bail is made out by the
applicants.
14. Accordingly, all the bail applications filed under Section 483 of
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 are allowed and all the
applicants are directed to be released on bail forthwith. It is directed
that the applicants shall be released on bail on each of them
furnishing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial
court. They shall appear before the trial court on each and every
date given by the said trial court, till disposal of the trial.
15. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Narendra Kumar Vyas)
Judge
Manish