1 CGHC010280572026 2026:CGHC:32057 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6720 of 2026 Kamran Abbas S/o Annu Hasan Aged About 29 Years R/o - Shiv Nagar Handipara Behind Sulabh P. S. - Azad Chowk District - Raipur (C.G.) (As Per Challan) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Azad Chowk District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ashish Gangwani, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anusha Naik, Deputy Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27/07/2026 1. 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. 42/2026 registered at Police Station Azad Chowk District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 under Sections 308(5), 296, 111, 351(3), 127(8), 115(2), 117(2), 61, 140(1), 310(2) of BNS and Sections 25, 27 of the Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that between 16.02.2026 and 19.02.2026, the applicant, along with other co-accused persons, allegedly formed an unlawful assembly with the common motive of kidnapping the complainants, Jeevan Yadav and Rakesh Sharma, extorting money from them, and assaulting them. It is alleged that the accused persons, armed with deadly weapons including a pistol, magazine and sticks, trespassed into the premises at Ghorai Talab, Ramkund, Raipur, created a riot by using force and violence, abused the complainants in obscene language referring to their mother and sister, and attempted to kill them with the intention of creating terror. On the basis of these allegations, the present crime came to be registered against the applicant and the other co-accused persons. Hence, the bail application. 3. 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 applicant had advanced a loan of Rs.2,00,000 to Jitendra Patel, who called the applicant near Karbala Pond on 16.02.2026 for repayment. During the meeting, a quarrel allegedly took place between Jitendra Patel and his associates and the applicant, which was subsequently resolved. Thereafter, on 19.02.2026, both parties again met near 3 Gorahi Pond for settlement of the financial transaction, and since the applicant alone was present at the spot, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He also submits that as per the prosecution itself, the complainant alleged that Jitendra Yadav had illegally confined him at his house on 17.02.2026 in connection with the recovery of Rs.2,00,000. Despite such specific allegations, Jitendra Yadav has not been arrayed as an accused in the case, which creates serious doubt regarding the fairness and credibility of the prosecution story. The applicant is in jail since 20.02.2026, 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. 4. 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 allegedly in collusion with co-accused persons, was a member of the unlawful assembly formed for kidnapping the complainants, extorting money from them, and assaulting them. It is alleged that the applicant participated in the rioting, criminal trespass, use of force and violence, abusive conduct, and attempt to murder the complainants while acting in furtherance of the common motive of the unlawful assembly. She also submits that the applicant has one criminal antecedent under the Gambling Act, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 4 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 offence, period of detention of the applicant since 20.02.2026, the fact that though the applicant allegedly in collusion with co-accused, formed an unlawful assembly, assaulted the complainants, extorting money, attempted to murder the complainant and another, but considering the fact no recovery of any incriminating article has been made from the possession of the present applicant and the applicant has only one criminal antecedent, which is under the Gambling Act, further the charge- sheet has been filed, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Kamran Abbas, involved in Crime No. 42/2026 registered at Police Station Azad Chowk District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 308(5), 296, 111, 351(3), 127(8), 115(2), 117(2), 61, 140(1), 310(2) of BNS and Sections 25, 27 of 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 5 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. 9. 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