1 2026:CGHC:26391 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5693 of 2026 Komal Sahu S/o Ravishankar Sahu Aged About 21 Years Resident Of Firangipara, Kota, Police Station - Kota, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kota, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Shreya Jaiswal, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.06.2026 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. 309/2026 registered at Police Station : Kota District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 25 of Arms Act and 27 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 24.04.2026, the Assistant Sub- Inspector Gopal Khandekar of Police Station Kota received secrete information from informer that one person was carrying and brandishing a Gupti knife in Firangipara, Kota and was intimidating the general public. Acting upon the said information, the police party immediately Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2026.06.30 17:54:52 +0530 2 proceeded to the spot. Upon reaching there, they allegedly found the accused waving a stainless-steel Gupti knife and threatening persons passing through the area. On noticing the police, the accused allegedly kept the knife in the pocket of his lower garment and attempted to run away. However, he was apprehended by the police after surrounding him. During interrogation, he revealed his identity as Komal Sahu. The police allegedly recovered and seized the Gupti knife from his possession in the presence of witnesses. On the basis of the seizure and allegations, Crime No. 309/2026 was registered at Police Station Kota under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, and the accused was arrested on 24.04.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the alleged recovery has been falsely shown by the police and no independent witness has supported the prosecution case. She fairly submits that there are 7 criminal antecedents against the present applicant, in all the cases, he has been granted bail. It is further submitted that the offences alleged are triable by the competent Magistrate, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 24.04.2026. It is contended that no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that a prohibited weapon was recovered from the conscious possession of the applicant and that he was found brandishing the weapon in a public place and intimidating the public. It is submitted that considering the 3 nature and gravity of the allegations and considering the 7 criminal antecedents are pending against the applicant, therefore the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of bail. Accordingly, prayer is made for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the nature of allegations, the period of custody undergone by the applicant since 24.04.2026, the fact that the investigation has been completed and that further custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a fit case to extend the benefit of regular bail to the applicant. 7. Let applicant, Komal Sahu, involved in Crime No. 309/2026 registered at Police Station : Kota District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 25 of Arms Act and 27 of Arms 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. 4 (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 for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Jyoti