1 CGHC010284932026 2026:CGHC:35681 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6786 of 2026 Sahil Chelak S/o Late Anup Chelak Aged About 19 Years R/o Subhash Chowk Near Goodwill Hospital P.S. Tikrapara, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) ...Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Tikrapara, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Leekesh Kumar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. 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. 403/2026, registered at Police Station - Tikrapara, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 119(1), 3(5), 308(2) of the BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.13 11:08:47 +0530 2 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 08.05.2026, the complainant alleged that while he was near Godwana Bhavan, Sahu Complex, Tikrapara, three unknown persons demanded money for liquor and, upon his refusal, assaulted him. It is further alleged that the accused forcibly took him to Siddharth Chowk, threatened him with a knife, compelled him to withdraw Rs. 10,000/- from an ATM, and fled away with the said amount after extending threats of dire consequences. On the basis of the said complaint, Police registered Crime No. 408/2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 119(1). 308(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. 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 no recovery of the alleged robbed amount, weapon or any other incriminating article has been made from the applicant or at his instance, and the alleged seizure is doubtful as it is supported only by the police party without reliable independent corroboration. It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the FIR, which was registered against Dinu and two unknown persons, and that he has subsequently been implicated during investigation without any proper or reliable identification or independent corroborative material. Learned counsel further submits that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore, custodial interrogation is no longer required. The offence is triable by the learned Magistrate and the trial is likely to take considerable time. Hence, continued detention of the applicant would amount to pre-trial punishment. 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 charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the present applicant, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, and that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 08.06.2026, coupled with the fact that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let applicant, Sahil Chelak, involved in Crime No. 403/2026, registered at Police Station - Tikrapara, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 119(1), 3(5), 308(2) of the BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on 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 he 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 cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav