1 2026:CGHC:19408 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 671 of 2026 1 - Suresh Gupta @ Suresh Prasad Gupta S/o Fulchand Gupta Aged About 50 Years R/o Giruwari P.S. Mauganj, District Riwa(M.P.) At Present Transport Nagar Banjari Dinesh Gupta House, P.S. Khamtarai, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kabir Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 27.04.2026 1.The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 258/2025, registered at Police Station Kabir Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 105 BNS and Section 185, 146/196 of Motor Vehicle Act. ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 2. That, the case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged an oral report before the concerned police station alleging that on the date of the incident, the applicant, while driving a truck bearing registration No. C.G. 07-C.J. 2545 in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased persons while overtaking it, resulting in their death. On the basis of the said complaint, the police registered an offence against the present applicant under Section 105 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as Sections 185 and 146/196 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the charge sheet has already been filed, therefore, there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with the evidence or creating any hindrance in the due process of law. Keeping the applicant behind bars for an indefinite period would amount to pre- trial punishment, which needs to be avoided. He submits that his detention will adversely affect the entire family. While not disputing that the incident resulted in the death of persons due to alleged rash and negligent driving, it is argued that, at best, the offence would fall under Section 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 17.12.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and 3 submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. It is contended that the applicant was driving the vehicle in an intoxicated state, being fully aware of the consequences of such conduct. It is further submitted that due to his rash and negligent driving, he ran over the victims, resulting in the death of two persons, and therefore, considering the gravity of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and further from perusal of the order-sheet dated 19.01.2026, the bail application was earlier adjourned to the last week of April 2026 in view of the period of detention, and also that the charge sheet has already been filed, the applicant has been in custody since 17.12.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take time, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let the applicant – Suresh Gupta, involved in Crime No. 258/2025, registered at Police Station Kabir Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 105 of BNS and 185, 146/196 of Motor Vehicle Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- 4 (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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 his, 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 opinion of the trial court absence of the 5 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 him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Saxena