AMIT KORRAM vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

ALFIZA
BAIG
Digitally signed
by ALFIZA BAIG
Date: 2026.10.29
14:53:06 +0530
1

CGHC010411532026 2026:CGHC:45342
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 10048 of 2026
1 - Amit Korram S/o Kanwal Korram Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Kaneri,
Maneripara, P.S.And Tehsil Purur, Distt- Balod (C.G.)
2 - Rakesh Mandavi S/o Sudharam Mandavi Aged About 24 Years R/o Village
Kaneri, Maneripara, P.S.And Tehsil Purur, Distt- Balod (C.G.)
... Applicants
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Purur, Distt- Balod (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicants : Mr. Shobit Koshta, Advocate
For Non-applicant : Mr. Himanshu Yadu, Panel Lawyer
SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
ORDER ON BOARD
27/10/2026
1. This is the first bail application filed by the applicants under Section 483
of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail,
as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 67/2026
registered at Police Station – Purur, District – Balod, Chhattisgarh for the
offences punishable under Sections 115 (2), 121 (1), 126 (2), 132, 191
(2), 191 (3), 221, 262, 263, 296 & 351 (3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, police authorities of Police Station -
Purur, District- Balod went to the arrest the Applicant No. 1 Amit Kumar

2
Korram at his residence, who was accused in Crime No.- 61/26, PS-
Purur, District- Balod, CG for offence u/s 20 (b) of NDPS. That, at the
time of apprehending the Applicant No. 1, the Applicant No. 2 who is
brother-in-law of Applicant No. 1 along with other co-accused persons
caused impediment in the arrest of Applicant No. 1 and also, they abused
and apprehended the police officials due to which, Assistant Sub
Inspector namely, Vishwajeet Markam sustained injuries. The incident
was reported to the concerned police station, based upon which
aforementioned crime was registered and applicants were arrested on
14.07.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant are innocent,
they have been falsely implicated in the crime. They have not committed
any offence as alleged. He submits that the allegation in the instant crime
are that they have caused hindrance in the work of the police officials
while they went to arrest the Applicant No.1 in his house in another crime
bearing Crime No. 61/2026 registered at P.S. Purur, District- Balod for
commission of offence under Section 20 (b) (ii) r/w. Section 8 of the
NDPS Act, 1985. He further contended that the Applicant No. 1 has been
enlarged on bail in the crime bearing Crime No. 61/2026 under Section
20 (b) (ii) r/w. Section 8 of the NDPS Act, 1985. Applicants are in jail
since 14.07.2026, charge-sheet has been filed. Hence, they may be
enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the submission made
by the counsel for applicant and would submit that the Applicant No. 2
have tried fled from the spot when, the police officials reached to arrest
the Applicant No. 1, at that time, both the applicants along with their
family members have caused hindrance in the arrest of Applicant No. 1
and also, have manhandled the police personnel in which, one of the

3
officials suffered injury. However, he do not dispute the submission of
counsel for the applicant, that charge-sheet has been filed.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the
documents filed along with the bail application.
6. Taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case,
submission of learned counsel for the parties, nature of the allegations,
period of pre-trial detention, trial will take considerable time to conclude,
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to
allow this bail application.
7. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed and it is directed that
applicants shall be released on bail upon their furnishing a personal bond
in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the
satisfaction of Trial Court concerned on the conditions that:
(a) 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.
(b) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date
fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of their absence,
without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under
Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(c) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to
secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and
the applicants fails 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.
(d) The applicants shall remain present, in person, 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 applicant is 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.

4
8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified
copy as per rules .
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Dey