1 CGHC010232422026 2026:CGHC:35677 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5531 of 2026 Mukesh Nagarchi Urf Kumkum S/o Yashvant Nagrachi Aged About 20 Years R/o Shitlapara Nayapara, P.S. Gobra Navapara Ward No. 21, District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Arang, District Raipur C.G. ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gajanand Rohan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.08.2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 259/2026 registered at Police Station - Arang, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 331,126(2) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.05.2026, at about 3:00 VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.13 11:08:47 +0530 2 p.m., the injured Chandraprakash Dahariya was returning from his in- laws’ village, Tuta, on his motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-04- NA-5724, along with his son Bhomeshwar. It is alleged that near Sonpari Bhantha, while crossing the canal towards Mokhala, three unidentified persons wearing scarves approached him on a motorcycle, stopped him and assaulted him with a knife, causing injuries on his waist, right shoulder and left back. The assailants allegedly robbed him of Rs.2,000/- in cash and a Samsung mobile phone and fled towards Kosamkhunta. Thereafter, Girish Jangde informed the applicant Vednarayan Dahariya, who, along with Vinod Dahariya, Bisahu Dahariya and Suryaprakash Dahariya, reached the spot and attended to the injured. On the basis of the report, the offence was registered and investigation was taken up. 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 investigation has been completed and the charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. The applicant has been in judicial custody for a considerable period and the trial is likely to take time to conclude. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, is a permanent resident with deep roots in society, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant undertakes to cooperate with the trial, regularly appear before the Trial Court, and abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, the applicant prays for grant of bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the applicant has two previous criminal antecedent, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant, and further taking into account the period of detention, as the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 18.05.2026, and the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Mukesh Nagarchi Urf Kumkum, involved in Crime No. 259/2026 registered at Police Station - Arang, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 331,126(2) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local 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 she 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 4 cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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. 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 Vaibhav