Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 29551 (CHH)

AJAY JAISWAL v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/6806/2026 · 2026-07-27

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010285252026 2026:CGHC:32334 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6806 of 2026 1. Ajay Jaiswal S/o Ramesh Jaiswal Aged About 28 Years R/o Gokuldham Colony Kabirdham, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) 2. Amit Chandravanshi S/o Gaukaran Alias Narayan Chandravanshi Aged About 31 Years R/o Paligunda, Police Station- Pipariya, District- Kawardha (C.G.) 3. Akbar Khan S/o Siddique Khan Aged About 35 Years R/o Pipariya, Police Station - Pipariya, District- Kawardha (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station - Chhura, District- Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Kripesh G. Kela, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.07.2026 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 74/2025 registered at Police Station – Chhura, District - Gariyaband (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 310(2), 351(3), 61(2) and 111(2)(B) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.07.29 16:49:43 +0530 2 2. According to the prosecution story, on 24.05.2025, the complainant, Suryakant Agrawal, lodged a report alleging that at about 1:00 A.M., while he, his mother, and his two children were sleeping in the hall of their house, his mother raised an alarm. Upon reaching the spot, the complainant allegedly found that 7-8 unidentified persons, with their faces covered, had forcibly entered the house. It is alleged that the assailants placed a knife on the complainant’s mother’s neck, threatened to kill the family if they raised any alarm, and restrained the complainant, his mother, and his two children by tying their mouths, hands, and legs with cello tape. Thereafter, the assailants allegedly broke open the locker of the almirah and decamped with cash amounting to Rs. 3,50,000/-, gold and silver ornaments valued at approximately Rs.14,70,000/-, and one mobile phone. On the basis of the said report, the police registered the present crime against the applicant and the other co-accused persons for the aforesaid offences. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that each of the applicants has only one criminal antecedent under the NDPS Act, which is still pending trial. He submits that the co-accused, namely, Hemant @ Kanha Agrawal and Shailesh Bagde, have already been granted regular bail by this Court vide orders dated 15.07.2026 and 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4383 of 2026 and MCRC No. 4892 of 2026, respectively, and that the case of the present applicants stands on the same footing as that of the said co- accused. He further submits that the applicants have been in judicial custody since 06.02.2026, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, and, therefore, they deserve to be enlarged on regular bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. However, he could not dispute the fact that identically situated co-accused persons have already been granted regular bail by this Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the other co-accused person, namely, Hemant @ Kanha Agrawal and Shailesh Bagde, have already been granted regular bail by this Court vide orders dated 15.07.2026 and 10.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 4383 of 2026 and MCRC No. 4892 of 2026, respectively. Moreover, the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court, the applicants are in jail since 06.02.2026, conclusion of the trial may take some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicants – Ajay Jaiswal, Amit Chandravanshi and Akbar Khan, involved in Crime No. 74/2025 registered at Police Station – Chhura, District - Gariyaband (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 331(4), 310(2), 351(3), 61(2) and 111(2)(B) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on their furnishing personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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. 4 (ii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them 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