Aditya Kumar Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

Digitally signed by SHUBHAM SHUBHAM SINGH SINGH RAGHUVANSHI RAGHUVANSHI Date: 2026.04.21 13:06:21 +0530

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCRC No. 3562 of 2026

¶6

Aditya Kumar Das, S/o- Upendra Das, Aged About 20 Years R/o- Vill- Latha, Sardar Tola, P.S And District-Saharsa (Bihar)

¶7

versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (Sho) P.S Baikuithpur, Dist- Korea (C.G.)

¶9

... Respondent (Cause-title is taken from CIS) For Applicant : Md. Sohail Khan, Adv. For Respondent/State : Mr. Suresh Tandan, P.L.

¶10

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board

¶11

20/04/2026

¶12

The applicant has preferred this 1^st bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita Act 2023 for grant of regular bail as he is arrested in connection with crime No. 348/2025, registered at Police Station – Baikunthpur, District- Koriya (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 109(1), 326(g), 332A, 249(a), 61(2) (a) and 3(5) BNS.

¶13

In this case there are total 5 accused persons. The prosecution's case, in short, is that on 14.10.2025, the main accused Suresh Thakur @ Kanpuriya, along with other co-accused persons, poured petrol on the house of his father-in-law and mother-in-law and set it ablaze using firecrackers. As a result, the house caught fire, leading to the death of his father-in-law Rai Ram Kewat, and injuries to his mother-in-law, Parvati. Her dying declaration was recorded. The allegation against the

¶14

2

¶15

applicant is that he helped co-accused Suresh Thakur in purchasing of a gun (Katta). Based on above, offence has been registered against the applicant and he was arrested on 06.11.2025.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime. The main accused is Suresh Thakur. Name of the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR. He is a resident of Bihar. In the dying declaration also, name of the applicant is not mentioned. The applicant is in jail since 06.11.2025. There are total 51 prosecution witnesses and the Trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, therefore, it is prayed that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶17

Per contra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the bail application and submits that as per the memorandum statement of main accused Suresh Thakur, the applicant has helped him in purchasing a gun (Katta). Further, a mobile phone has also been seized from the applicant. Hence, looking to the nature of offence, the applicant may not be released on bail.

¶18

I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of Counsel appearing for the parties, evidence collected by the prosecution, detention period of the applicant, further considering the fact that the trial is likely to take some time to be finalized, without commenting on merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.

¶20

Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed .

¶21

It is directed that the applicant shall be released on bail on executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one solvent surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed.

¶22

Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge

¶23

Shubham

Aditya Kumar Das v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Kumar Das v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Birendra Markam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Premsingh Rawat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mohan Satankar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

B.L. Gangwani Vs C. Yajulu Rao

Narendra Alias Chhotu Sidar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh