1 2026:CGHC:4402 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 869 of 2026 Sumit Mahajan S/o Gopal Mahajan Aged About 35 Years R/o Chandan Awas, Rajkishore Nagar, House No. 5/29, Police Station-Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O3cer, Police Station Civil Line, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ujjawal Choubey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State. : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.01.2026 1. This is the 9rst bail application 9led 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. 1192/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.), for the o=ences punishable under Section 111(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 25 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, it is alleged that the applicant, along with other co-accused persons, namely Lattu Pandey and Avinash Borker, prepared a plan to kill Maidy. For the said purpose, the accused ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.29 11:02:19 +0530 2 persons allegedly purchased a pistol from Banaras. A video to the said e=ect went viral on social media, and on the basis of the said video, the police personnel interrogated the co-accused Lattu Pandey, who was in the custody of Police Station Sarkanda in connection with another crime. During interrogation, the said Lattu Pandey allegedly admitted that he, along with other co-accused persons, had prepared a plan to kill Maidy. On the basis of the said admission, the police personnel seized one pistol from the possession of the accused. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in the case. He submits that the applicant never made any plan to kill the victim, Maidy, and has been falsely roped in only on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that although the applicant has seven criminal antecedents under the IPC/BNS and the Gambling Act, only one case is presently pending and the other cases have already been disposed of. He submits that the applicant has been in jail since 13.10.2025 and that the conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. She submits that the allegation against the applicant is that the applicant, along with co-accused Lattu Pandey and Avinash Borker, conspired to kill Maidy and allegedly procured a pistol from Banaras, which surfaced through a viral video, and was later disclosed by Lattu Pandey during police interrogation in another case. She further submits that the present applicant has 07 criminal antecedents, under the IPC/BNS, shows that the applicant is a habitual o=ender, therefore, he is not entitled for grant 3 of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that although the applicant has 07 criminal antecedents under the IPC/BNS and the Gambling Act, only one case is presently pending, for which explanations have been provided in paragraph 4(a) of the present bail application, moreover, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, the applicant has been languishing in jail since 13.10.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. 7. Let the Applicant – Sumit Mahajan, involved in Crime No. 1192/2025 registered at Police Station Civil Line, District – Bilaspur (C.G.), for the o=ences punishable under Section 111(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 25 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 9le an undertaking to the e=ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 9xed 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 9xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su3cient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 4 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 9xed 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 9xed 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 su3cient 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. O3ce is directed to send a certi9ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek