1 CGHC010274782026 2026:CGHC:31470 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6632 of 2026 Tekram Nirmalkar S/o Uderam Nirmalkar, Aged About 37 Years R/o Ganaud, P. S. Rakhi, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O.) P.S. Rakhi, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shalvin Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.07.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 155/2025 registered at Police Station : Rakhi, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. As per the prosecution story, the deceased, Toman Sahu, allegedly committed suicide by hanging himself on the night of 15.06.2023, leaving behind a suicide note in which the present applicant, Tekram, was named. It is alleged that the applicant, Tekram, had confronted the deceased over his alleged illicit relationship with the applicant’s wife. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.24 13:20:51 +0530 2 Thereafter, the matter was brought before the village Panchayat, where the deceased was advised by the Panchas to stay away from the applicant’s wife. It is further alleged that the deceased felt humiliated before the villagers and, on account of such humiliation, took the unfortunate step of ending his life. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the alleged incident took place in June, 2023, whereas the FIR was registered only on 15.09.2025, after an inordinate and unexplained delay of more than two years. Such an extraordinary delay casts serious doubt on the very genesis and authenticity of the prosecution case. It strongly suggests that the FIR is the result of deliberation, consultation, and an afterthought, intended to falsely implicate the present applicant. He also submits that the prosecution has failed to furnish any plausible or justifiable explanation for the delay of more than two years in registering the FIR against the present applicant. The authenticity and genuineness of the alleged suicide note remain wholly unestablished. The investigation itself reveals that no admitted handwriting samples of the deceased could be obtained from his residence, school, or the Gram Panchayat for comparison by a handwriting expert. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he has been in custody since 29.12.2025. As the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, he therefore prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that in the present case, the charge- sheet has not submitted before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the unexplained delay of more than two years in lodging the FIR and further that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, moreover, the charge- sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court, the present applicant has been languishing in jail since 29.12.2025, trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let applicant, Tekram Nirmalkar, involved in Crime No. 155/2025 registered at Police Station : Rakhi, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 4 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 for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek