1 CGHC010243972026 2026:CGHC:36866 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5716 of 2026 Suraj @ Yash Yadu S/o Rampal Yadu Aged About 19 Years R/o Sejbahar Near Pani Tanki, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O/cer, Police Station Mujgahan, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 18/08/2026 1. This 9rst bail application has been 9led by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking grant of regular bail as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.130/2026 registered at Police Station Mujgahan, District Raipur (C.G.) for the o<ences punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, is that on 31.05.2026 at about 13:30 hours, on the basis of secret information received by Assistant Sub-Inspector Santosh Lal Sahu, Police Station KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Mujgahan, he along with police sta< and witnesses reached near Atal Chowk, Sejbahar, Village Dhusera Road, District Raipur, where the present applicant was allegedly found carrying a sharp- edged pointed iron knife and was frightening the passersby by displaying the same. The applicant was apprehended and a sharp- edged pointed iron knife, measuring approximately 10 inches in total length, having a blade of about 6½ inches and handle of about 3½ inches, was allegedly recovered from his possession. As the applicant could not produce any document in respect of the said knife, the same was seized and he was arrested. After completion of investigation, the 9nal report has been prepared. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant has not committed any o<ence as alleged against him and there is no su/cient material to constitute the o<ences punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. It is further submitted that the allegations made against the applicant are false and baseless and that the applicant has not acted in the manner as alleged by the prosecution. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has one criminal antecedent of similar nature, which has already been disclosed and explained in Part-D relating to criminal antecedents in the bail application and the applicant is in jail since 31.05.2026 and the trial is likely to take some time therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the applicant was apprehended at the 3 spot while allegedly carrying a sharp-edged pointed iron knife and the said knife has been seized from his possession. She further submits that the applicant has one criminal antecedent of similar nature, which is still pending. Therefore, she prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary and other material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the investigation has already been completed and the charge- sheet has been 9led before the competent Court and also considering the criminal antecedent of the applicant as explained in Part-D (Criminal Antecedents) of the bail application, the recovery made from the possession of the applicant and further considering that the applicant is in judicial custody since 31.05.2026 thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Le the the applicant namely – Suraj @ Yash Yadu, involved in Crime No.130/2026 registered at Police Station Mujgahan, District Raipur (C.G.) for the o<ences punishable under Sections 25 and 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 9le an undertaking to the e<ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 9xed for evidence when the witnesses are present in 4 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 9xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su/cient 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 9xed 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 9xed 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 su/cient 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. O/ce is directed to send a certi9ed copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal