1 CGHC010296732026 2026:CGHC:35982 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7458 of 2026 Lakki Yadav S/o Sri Amardeep Yadav Aged About 19 Years R/o Dipupara, Near Durga Mandir, Tarbahar, Police Station Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through S.H.O. Police Station Tarbahar, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Manoj Kumar Yadav, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/08/2026 1. This is the ;rst bail application ;led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 71/2026 registered at Police Station Tarbahar, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o=ence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 06.03.2026 at about 21:39 hours, while Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police Station KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Tarbahar was on town patrolling duty, he received a secret information that a person was standing in the parking area of Hotel Shivnery, Tarbahar in illegal possession of a weapon. Acting upon the said information, the police party immediately reached the spot, cordoned the area and apprehended the applicant namely Lakki Yadav. On his personal search, conducted in the presence of witnesses, one steel button knife was recovered from the rear pocket of his trousers. The applicant was served with a notice under Section 94 of the BNSS requiring him to produce any valid authority or licence for possessing the said weapon, however, he failed to produce the same. Consequently, the knife was seized, the applicant was arrested on 06.03.2026 and Crime No.71/2026 was registered against him for the o=ence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. After completion of investigation, charge- sheet has been ;led before the competent Court. 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 investigation has already been completed and the charge-sheet has been ;led before the competent Court. It is also submitted that the alleged recovery is only of a knife and no overt act of using the same against any person has been alleged. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 06.03.2026. He further submits that so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, the applicant has six criminal antecedents, all of which are still pending trial, out of which one case pertains to the o=ence under the Arms 3 Act of the year 2025, as duly explained in Part-D (Criminal Antecedents) of the present bail application. He, therefore, prays that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been ;led before the competent Court. He further submits that a steel button knife has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, learned State counsel could not dispute the fact that the applicant has six criminal antecedents, including one case registered under the Arms Act, as explained in the bail application. Accordingly, he submits that the applicant is a habitual o=ender, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 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, the nature of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the investigation has already been completed and the charge- sheet has been ;led before the competent Court and also considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant as explained in Part-D (Criminal Antecedents) of the bail application, the recovery of a steel button knife from the possession of the applicant and further considering that the applicant is in judicial custody since 06.03.2026 thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 4 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Le the the applicant namely – Lakki Yadav, involved in Crime No.71/2026, registered at Police Station Tarbahar, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the o=ence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, 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 ;le an undertaking to the e=ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates ;xed 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 ;xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without suCcient 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 ;xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates ;xed 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 suCcient 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. OCce is directed to send a certi;ed copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal