Durgesh Singh Thakur Alias Lala Thakur S/o Shubham Singh Thakur Aged About 38 Years v. State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:36097 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5829 of 2025 Durgesh Singh Thakur Alias Lala Thakur S/o Shubham Singh Thakur Aged About 38 Years R/o Chindpara, Ward No. 16, Budbud Pali, Police Station And Tahsil Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Pali, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant
Legal Reasoning
Vivek Kumar Kaushik has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 5720 of 2025 vide order dated 22.072025, but not named in the FIR. It is further submitted that the statement of Harsh Jaiswal, recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, shows the 4 participation of the applicant. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of regular 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, the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the dispute, and the material available in the case diary, and further considering the fact that the statement of the injured, Anil Jaiswal, who was the cousin of the deceased, recorded on 14.05.2025, shows that although he has specifically stated about the participation of the applicant along with the co-accused who were armed with deadly weapons and committed the murder of the deceased, the mere fact that his statement was recorded after two months of the incident cannot be a ground to doubt the prosecution’s case. Moreover, considering that the bail application of one of the co-accused, Vivek Kumar Kaushik, whose name was mentioned in the written complaint but not in the FIR, has already been rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 5720 of 2025 vide order dated 22.07.2025, and the manner in which the incident took place in the colliery between the parties and the deceased was done to death, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the first bail application of the applicant – Durgesh Singh Thakur Alias Lala Thakur, involved in Crime No. 114/2025 registered at Police Station – Pali, District – Korba (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 61(2)(a) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 5 27 of the Arms Act, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Abhishek Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice
Arguments
: Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate along with Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. For Objector : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sahu, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 25.07.2025 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 who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 114/2025 registered at Police Station – Pali, District – Korba (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 61(2)(a) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2025.07.25 20:51:05 +0530 2 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution’s case, in brief, there are two private transporter groups, namely SN Group and MTC Group, involved in the transportation of coal from the Saraipali mines to the concerned purchasers. On 28.03.2025, at around 10:00 PM, a dispute arose between the above-mentioned transporter groups, resulting in a free fight between them, in which one Rohit Jaiswal ultimately died. The incident was reported in writing by one Anil Jaiswal at Pali Police Station, wherein it was informed that the deceased, Rohit Jaiswal, worked as a coal lifter at the Saraipali mines. Another group of coal lifters, namely Roshan Singh, Gaurav Singh Thakur, Vasu Thakur, Saurabh Shrivas, Sushant Thakur @ Sijju, Sanskar Thakur, Monty Kashyap, Mukesh Shrivas, Sunil Sagar, Prabhat Dubey, Nilesh Singh Raj, Kailash Kaiwart, Vinod Singh, Vivek Kaushik, Mayank Thakur, and others, allegedly started fighting with the deceased, Rohit Jaiswal, at the gate of the mines using a country-made pistol, sword, gupti, knife, sticks, etc. It is further alleged that the incident took place in the presence of the Station In-Charge of Police Station, Pali. Based on the written complaint made by Anil Jaiswal, Pali Police Station registered FIR bearing Crime No. 114/2025 on 29.03.2025 for offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 103(1), 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, against a total of 18 accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the written 3 complaint lodged by Anil Jaiswal, who happens to be an injured witness and also the cousin of the deceased, did not mention the name of the applicant and only mentioned 18 accused persons therein. He also submits that similarly, the FIR did not mention the name of the applicant. However, subsequently, the memorandum statements of co-accused persons, Sourabh Shrivas and Rahul Nirmalkar were recorded, and they disclosed the involvement of the present applicant in the present case. He further submits that the statement of the injured/complainant Anil Jaiswal, recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS on 14.05.2025, was taken after a lapse of two months from the incident, which itself raises questions about the involvement of the applicant. He also submits that there is no prima facie evidence against the accused, and the arrest based solely on the statement of co-accused persons does not satisfy the requirement of reasonable suspicion for the purpose of arrest. He submits that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 29.03.2025, and the conclusion of the trial may take some time; therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the State as well as the for the complainant vehemently oppose the prayer for bail of the applicant and submit that the bail application of one of the co- accused, whose name was present in the written complaint namely,