1 CGHC010246682026 2026:CGHC:28429 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6092 of 2026 Nageshwar Nirmalkar @ Nagesh S/o Chovaram Aged About 26 Years R/o Daldal Sivani, Ekta Chowk, Near Manish Chicken Centre, P.S. Pandri, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Pandri, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Arun Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 286/2025 registered at Police Station- Pandri, District- Raipur MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.07.10 11:12:15 +0530 2 (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.10.2025, the police of Police Station Pandri, Raipur allegedly received secret information that the applicant was carrying a knife near Science City Chowk and was creating fear among the public. Acting upon the said information, the police apprehended the applicant and allegedly recovered an iron knife measuring about 29 cm in total length from his possession. As the applicant could not produce any valid licence or authority for possessing the said weapon, Crime No. 286/2025 was registered against him for the offences punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Thereafter, upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case by the complainant. He further submits that there is no ingredient of offence punishable under Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act even if the prosecution story is taken on its face value. The allegation made by the prosecution against the applicant is false and baseless. Admittedly, no injury has been caused to any person by the alleged weapon and the prosecution story does not disclose any actual use thereof resulting in bodily harm. He further submits that so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, 3 he has already been acquitted in all the previous cases and the same has been explained in para D of the bail application. He lastly submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.10.2025 and though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application of the applicant and also the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 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 allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that even if the prosecution story is taken at its face value, no offence is made out against the present applicant and further so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant is concerned, the applicant has already been acquitted in all the cases, the applicant is in jail since 23.10.2025 and though the charge-sheet has already been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time as the trial is at its initial stage hence, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Nageshwar Nirmalkar @ Nagesh, involved in Crime No. 286/2025 registered at Police Station- Pandri, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 25 & 27 of 4 the Arms 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:- (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 them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Manpreet