1 CGHC010312582026 2026:CGHC:36149-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 756 of 2026 1 - Jitesh Anand @ Jitu S/o Sh. Vijay Kumar Aged About 28 Years Through His Pairokar/ Brother Sh. Hunny Anand R/o House No.514/11 , Sora Kothi, Gau Karan Road, District Rohtak, Haryana 124001. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, P.S. Cyber Police Thana, (Range Sarguja) District Surguja/ Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh 497001 2 - Mr. Rahul Bansal I P S/ City S.P. Ambikapur I.O. Concerned, F I R No. 3/ PS Cyber Police Thana, (Range Sarguja) District Surguja Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh 497001 3 - HC Anshul P S Cyber Police Thana, (Range Sarguja) District Surguja Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh 497001 4 - HC Praveen Rathore P S Cyber Police Thana, (Range Surguja) District Surguja Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh 497001 ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Shri Akash Kumar Kundu, Advocate. For State : Shri Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, CJ Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 14.08.2026 Per, Ramesh Sinha, CJ. 1 Heard. INDRAJEET SAHU Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2026.08.14 18:29:40 +0530 2 2 The present MCC has been filed seeking modification in paragraph 28 of the judgment dated 03.08.2026 passed by this court in WP(Cr) No.388 of 2026. Vide the said order this court declaring the petitioner’s detention illegal, unconstitutional and quashed the remand order and directed his release from custody upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.5,00,000/- with two solvent sureties of the like amount each, one of whom was required to be a local surety and another from his family. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that despite his bona fide efforts, he is unable to furnish the bail bonds on account of his financial incapacity and due to inability to arrange a local solvent surety as he is permanent resident of State of Haryana and as such he is still in custody. Therefore, appropriate modification in paragraph 28 of the said judgment is sought to the extent that he be released by imposing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- by dispensing requirement of furnishing a local surety. 4 Learned counsel for the State would submit that one of the co-accused in same crime number was granted regular bail by this court on 05.02.2026 in MCrC No.10335 of 2025 subject to furnishing two local sureties and it is stated that the said co-accused Rohan Kandera also belongs to State of Haryana, has arranged the local sureties and he has been released on bail. 5 Be that as it may, considering the total facts and circumstances of the case; the fact that the petitioner belongs to State of Haryana and shows his inability to furnish local surety and also considering the fact that despite order of releasing him from custody, he could not be released from custody, the present MCC is partly allowed and the 3 petitioner shall be released upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs only) with two solvent sureties of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned, out of whom one should be a family member of the petitioner. Rest of all the conditions mentioned in the order dated 03.08.2026 passed in WPCR No.388 of 2026 shall remain intact. 6 Consequently, the present MCC stands partly allowed and disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice inder