Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15282 (CHH)

TIKENDRA @ TEKENDRA KUMAR SINHA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/270/2026 · 2026-01-11

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:1697 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 270 of 2026 Tikendra @ Tekendra Kumar Sinha S/o Lilar Singh Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Matiya P, Post Khapri, Tehsil And District Balod Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Khadgaon, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12/01/2026 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. 33/2025 registered at Police Station Khadgaon, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) r/w 3(5), 61(2) of AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 07.05.2025, the complainant submitted a written complaint before the concerned police station alleging that the applicant along with co-accused persons induced her daughter, aged about 20 years, on the false pretext of securing her enrolment in the National Indian Team for Martial Arts for international tournaments. The complainant’s daughter, being a national-level martial arts player, believed the representation and agreed to the proposal. It is alleged that pursuant to such inducement, the complainant’s daughter transferred a total amount of Rs.6,77,000/- into the bank account of the present applicant between 31.08.2024 and 08.02.2025, and also paid an amount of Rs.20,000/- into the account of another co-accused. On the basis of the said complaint, an FIR was registered. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that on one hand, the prosecution story states that the complainant’s daughter is a national-level martial arts player, while on the other hand, it is alleged that she was lured by the applicant and co-accused persons for her selection in the National Team, which shows a contradiction in the prosecution case. He also submits that the complainant and her daughter had earlier filed affidavits before 3 the learned trial court expressing willingness for compromise at the time of rejection of the first bail application. Copies of the said bail orders and affidavits are filed as Annexure A/3 and Annexure A/4, respectively. The applicant is in jail since 23.08.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, 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 bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the applicant is alleged to have, along with co-accused persons, dishonestly induced the complainant’s daughter on the false pretext of her selection in the National Martial Arts Team and thereby received money from her, constituting the alleged offence. 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, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 23.08.2025, the fact that though the applicant is alleged to have, along with co-accused persons, dishonestly induced the complainant’s daughter on the false pretext of her selection in the National Martial Arts Team and thereby received money from her, constituting the alleged offence, but considering the fact that the 4 applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Tikendra @ Tekendra Kumar Sinha, involved in Crime No. 33/2025 registered at Police Station Khadgaon, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4) r/w 3(5), 61(2) of BNS, 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:- (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 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 5 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 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil