1 2026:CGHC:27191 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5857 of 2026 Altaf Khan S/o Arman Khan Aged About 21 Years Works As Self Employed R/o Village Raghunathpur, P.S. Lundra, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Sadar Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Amarnath Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02/07/2026 1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was no occasion for the applicant to furnish the details of the bail application filed before the concerned CJM, which came to be rejected. It is submitted that, thereafter, the applicant preferred two bail applications before the concerned Sessions Court, the AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 particulars whereof have been disclosed in the present application, and certified copies of both the orders have been annexed. Hence, the objection stands waived. 2. 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. 71/2026 registered at Police Station Sadar Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 190, 191(2), 127(7), 310(2), 135 of the BNS. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Arup Das, along with his companion, Arun Sao, had come from Kolkata to Ambikapur in connection with the fish business. On 03.02.2026, while they were proceeding to inspect fish ponds, the present applicant along with other co-accused persons allegedly intercepted them on motorcycles, abused and threatened them, forcibly took them to an unknown place, wrongfully confined them throughout the night, and robbed them of cash, mobile phones and a purse. It is further alleged that the accused compelled the complainant to transfer money through ATM withdrawals and PhonePe transactions. Thereafter, the complainant and his companion were released on 04.02.2026. On the basis of the report, the police registered the crime, conducted investigation, and after completion thereof, filed the charge-sheet against the 3 present applicant and a co-accused for the aforesaid offences. Hence, the bail application. 4. 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 the entire case against the applicant is primarily based on his alleged presence in the CCTV footage. Mere presence at the place of occurrence, without any overt act or incriminating material, does not establish his participation in the alleged offence. He also submits that while returning from work, he noticed a dispute near Ambedkar Chowk and stopped only to pacify the quarrel, after which he immediately left the place. The complainant has also stated before the Court below that they had no prior acquaintance with the applicant. He later submits that the complainant and the injured witnesses personally appeared before the Court below and filed written no- objection expressing that they have no objection to the grant of bail to the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 05.02.2026, 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. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the applicant along with the co-accused persons, intercepted the complainant and his 4 companion, wrongfully confined them, robbed them of cash and other valuables, and compelled them to transfer money through ATM withdrawals and PhonePe transactions. His involvement is further alleged on the basis of CCTV footage showing his presence at or near the place of occurrence. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 05.02.2026, the fact that though the applicant along with the co-accused, wrongfully confined the complainant and robbed him of cash and other valuables, besides compelling him to transfer money through ATM and PhonePe transactions, the involvement of applicant is primarily based on CCTV footage showing his alleged presence at the place of occurrence, but considering the fact that no injury has been caused to the complainant and the complainant and the other witnesses personally appeared before the trial Court and filed written no-objection expressing that they have no objection to the grant of bail to the applicant, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 5 9. Let the Applicant-Altaf Khan, involved in Crime No. 71/2026 registered at Police Station Sadar Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 190, 191(2), 127(7), 310(2), 135 of the 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 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 6 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. 10. 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