1 CGHC010292522026 2026:CGHC:38692 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7021 of 2026 Sagar Hemla S/o Shri Sikka Hemla Aged About 42 Years R/o Gangaloor Base Camp, District : Bijapur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Geedam, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Manohar Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01.09.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.56/2026, registered at Police Station- Geedam, District- Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3) and 108 of the BNS. MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2026.09.01 15:41:02 +0530 2 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant Hemsing Thakur lodged a written complaint at Police Station Geedam on 25.06.2026 alleging that on the night of 10.06.2026, he and deceased Tamradhwaj Sahu alias Sonu were travelling from Bijapur towards Raipur in vehicle No. CG-04-PC-9751 after loading goods therein. On 11.06.2026, at about 4:00–5:00 p.m., when they reached Banjaring Ghat, Geedam, the vehicle driven by the deceased allegedly met with an accident involving a Mercedes car bearing registration No. KA-03-MQ-6809 coming from the opposite direction, resulting in damage to its front portion. It is alleged that two persons came out of the Mercedes car, whereupon its driver abused the deceased, demanded compensation of ₹1 crore on account of the damage caused to the vehicle, allegedly assaulted him by slapping him and threatened that, in case the said amount was not paid, he and his family would be destroyed. Thereafter, at the request of the deceased, the complainant left the place in another passing vehicle and proceeded towards Raipur. On the following day, the complainant was informed by the deceased’s brother, Khileshwar Sahu, that several videos of the deceased had been uploaded on Instagram, wherein he was allegedly speaking about the accident and expressing his intention to die. Subsequently, the complainant came to know that Tamradhwaj Sahu alias Sonu had committed suicide by hanging. On the basis of the written complaint, the present FIR was registered against the applicant, who was 3 thereafter arrested on 26.06.2026. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that in the videos allegedly uploaded by the deceased on Instagram, the deceased neither took the name of the present applicant nor alleged that he had been assaulted by the applicant. On the contrary, the deceased himself stated that he had been driving under the influence of ganja and was addicted to intoxicating substances, and, therefore, the extreme step taken by him was the result of his intoxicated condition and cannot be attributed to any act of the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is in custody since 26.06.2026, has no criminal antecedents and, therefore, it is prayed that he be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that there is sufficient material available on record indicating the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the alleged offence. It is submitted that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and that the investigation is still under progress. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence and the circumstances in which the deceased committed suicide, learned State counsel prays for rejection of the bail application. 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 of 4 allegations made against the applicant, the material available on record, particularly the videos allegedly uploaded by the deceased, wherein the applicant has not been specifically named and the deceased is stated to have denied any assault by the applicant, coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 26.06.2026, has no criminal antecedents and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Sagar Hemla, involved in Crime No.56/2026, registered at Police Station- Geedam, District- Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3) and 108 of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned:- (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 them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya 5 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Manpreet