1 2026:CGHC:131 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9002 of 2025 Durgesh Yadav S/o Late Chhabi Lal Yadav Aged About 32 Years R/o Near S.B.T. College Kududand, Bilaspur, Police Station - Civil Line Bilaspur, Tahsil - Bilapsur, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Civil Line Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vishvanath Prasad Shrivas, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Nitansh Kumar Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.01.202 6 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 1213/2025 registered at Police Station- Civil Line Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 16.10.2025, the applicant was allegedly found holding a Chapad (iron-made weapon) and threatening the general public near Hanuman Mandir Tila. Upon RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 receiving information, the Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Civil Lines, Bilaspur, directed A.S.I. Gajendra Sharma, who along with other police staff reached the spot. The police allegedly seized the Chapad (iron-made weapon) from the possession of the applicant and thereafter took him into custody. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, a reputed person, and has not committed the alleged offence, but has been falsely implicated by the prosecution. Though the applicant has four previous criminal antecedents, but out of which, he has been acquitted in two cases and one case is pending under the Arms Act, and one case is under the IPC, which is pending, and the same has been wrongly used as a basis to falsely implicate him in the present case. It is further submitted that no Chapad (weapon) was seized from the possession of the applicant at the time of the alleged incident, and when the applicant refused to sign as a witness under pressure from the police ofÏcials, he was falsely implicated. In fact, the applicant is a professional rickshaw driver, and due to his refusal to provide his rickshaw to the police at night without payment, he has been maliciously implicated in the present crime. He further submits that the present applicant is in jail since 16.10.2025, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the present bail application and submits that on 16.10.2025, the applicant was found holding a Chapad (iron-made weapon) and threatening the 3 general public near Hanuman Mandir Tila. Upon receiving information, the police party led by A.S.I. Gajendra Sharma reached the spot and seized the weapon from the possession of the applicant, who was apprehended on the spot. The act of the applicant created fear among the public at large. He further submits that the present applicant has 04 criminal antecedents which shows that he is a habitual offender, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that though the applicant was found holding a Chapad (iron-made weapon) and threatening the general public near Hanuman Mandir Tila, the weapon was seized from his possession by the police, and has four previous criminal antecedents, but he has been acquitted in two cases and one case is pending under the Arms Act, and one case is under the IPC, which is pending, criminal antecedents are explained in the afÏdavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant, and the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and he is in jail since 16.10.2025, the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Durgesh Yadav, involved in Crime No. 1213/2025 registered at Police Station- Civil Line Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 25 and 4 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant 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 5 opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan