Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 37671 (CHH)

RAMESHWAR BHASKAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/8647/2026 · 2026-09-28

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010339892026 2026:CGHC:42437 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8647 of 2026 1 - Rameshwar Bhaskar S/o Anjor Das Bhaskar, Aged About 52 Years R/o Satnam Nagar Ameri, Police Station - Sakri, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police - Station Civil Line, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Abhipreet Bajpai, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 29.09.2026 1) The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.842/2026, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340 & 61(2) of the BNS. 2) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a written report was lodged by the Naib Nazir Grade-II, posted in the Office of the Tehsildar, NIRMALA RAO NIRMALA RAO 2 Bilaspur, to the effect that the present applicant, in collusion with other persons, had deliberately concealed the actual cause of death and, on the pretext of a snake bite/poisonous animal bite under the Government scheme, obtained financial assistance of Rs.4,00,000/- dishonestly by fraudulent means, thereby causing loss to the State exchequer. On the basis of the said report, the police registered the offences against the present applicant, as stated above. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that, at the relevant time, the applicant was posted as a Home Guard Security personnel at C.I.M.S. and that there was no criminal antecedent against the applicant. He would submit that he was not involved in the commission of the crime at all. It is also contended that the co-accused, namely, Ram Kumar Patanwar, has already been granted regular bail in M.Cr.C. No.8243 of 2026 vide order dated 22.09.2026. It is also argued that the investigation has already been completed, the applicant has been in jail since 21.07.2026, and the trial may take some time to conclude. Therefore, he would pray for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the bail application and submit that there are serious allegations against the present applicant and, therefore, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, and particularly considering the fact that the applicant was posted as a Home Guard Security personnel at C.I.M.S. at the relevant time and was not directly involved in the commission of the crime, that the 3 charge-sheet has already been filed, that the applicant has been in jail since 21.07.2026, that the co-accused, namely, Ram Kumar Patanwar, has already been granted regular bail in M.Cr.C. No.8243 of 2026 vide order dated 22.09.2026, and further that the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7) It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (a) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required; (b) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; and (c) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial. The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi