Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16233 (CHH)

ABHAY SINGH TOMAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/9793/2025 · 2026-01-28

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:5036 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9793 of 2025 Abhay Singh Tomar S/o Amol Singh Tomar Aged About 22 Years R/o Village Khanaita, Tahsil - Gohad, Jila-Bhind, P.S. Endori, Madhya Pradesh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Basantpur, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Yogendra Pandey Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.01.2026 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. 257 of 2025 registered at Police Station : Basantpur Rajnandgaon District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 296, 115(2) & 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act and Section 21 of VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.01.30 10:50:52 +0530 2 Mines and Minerals Development Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 11.06.2025 at village Mohad, Police Station Basantpur, District Rajnandgaon, certain miscreants were found engaged in unlawful excavation. and transportation of minerals without any valid authority, and when villagers and concerned persons objected to such illegal activity, the accused persons formed an unlawful. assembly, assaulted the complainant, and even opened fire with the intention to kill, during the incident, many earth-moving machines, including JCBs and trucks belonging to the present applicant, were discovered at the spot and were being used in the illegal mining operation, leading to the allegation that the applicant, being the owner and supplier of the machinery, had knowingly abetted, conspired, and facilitated the commission of the offences, it is further alleged that the telephonic contact and location details establish his link with other accused persons who were physically present at the site, thereby connecting him to the conspiracy behind the unlawful activity; on this basis, offences under Sections 109(2), 115, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 296, and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, and Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, have been registered against him and the present applicant has been arrested on 14.06.2025. 3. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has falsely implicated in Crime No. 257/2025 without there being any credible or cogent evidence against him, as his name does not find mention in the FIR and no witness has attributed any overt act to him. The only basis of implication is the presence of certain JCB machines and trucks 3 belonging to his duly registered firm “Akshay Traders”, which lawfully provides machinery on hire, and mere presence of such equipment at the spot cannot establish his culpability. It is further submitted that on the date and time of the alleged occurrence i.e., 11.06.2025, the applicant was present in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, attending the tenth- day rituals of his late mother-in-law, which stands conclusively established by the death certificate, toll plaza records, hotel booking receipts, and the affidavit of the family priest. The investigation in the matter has already been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed, hence no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. No weapon, incriminating material, or any article connecting the applicant with the alleged offences has been seized from his possession. The medical reports of the alleged victims reveal only simple injuries, and all the injured persons were discharged on the very same day, which rules out commission of any heinous or life- threatening offence warranting prolonged incarceration. The only material relied upon by the prosecution is the so-called memorandum statements of co-accused persons, which are legally weak, not substantive evidence, and cannot be the basis of fastening criminal liability in the absence of independent discovery of admissible facts. That there is no material to suggest that the applicant had knowledge of, or participation in, any illegal act, nor that he derived any monetary or other benefit from the alleged incident. The applicant is a permanent resident of District Rajnandgaon, a reputed businessman with deep family and social ties, and is therefore not likely to abscond or evade the due process of law. The applicant has an unblemished record with no criminal antecedents, demonstrating that he is not likely to indulge 4 in any unlawful activity if released on bail. It is further submitted that the applicant is a patient of chronic ailments such as hypertension and diabetes, requiring continuous medical care, and his prolonged incarceration is detrimental to his health. The applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial, attend all hearings, and abide by any condition that this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the factthat the co-accused persons have already been granted ball by this Courn vide order dated 24.09.2025 and 15.10.2025 passed in MCRC Nos. 7726/2026 and 8235/2025, respectively, further, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed and he is in jail since 12.06.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let applicant, Abhay Singh Tomar, involved in Crime No. 257 of 2025 registered at Police Station : Basantpur Rajnandgaon District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 296, 115(2) & 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya 5 Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act and Section 21 of Mines and Minerals Development Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount 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 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned forthwith for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav