1 2026:CGHC:15848 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3090 of 2026 Mohammed Mustakeem @ Sohail S/o Lt. Shri Md. Shaheed Aged About 27 Years R/o Khaparganj, Thana City Kotwali, Tahsil And District Bilspur, (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 07.04.2026 1. This is the :rst bail application :led 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. 719/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the o=ences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296, 115(2), 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that the complainant, Naresh Sahu, reported the incident at Police Station City Kotwali, Bilaspur, stating that he works at a gas agency near Mukti Dham Chowk. On 31.12.2025, at around 8:50 PM, while he was crossing Shanichari on his way to his ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.08 11:18:13 +0530 2 home at Chingraj Para, the applicant/accused and his friend followed him on a motorcycle, stopped him, and asked whether he was a member of Ram Singh Thakur’s group. They further alleged that he made remarks about Hindus and Muslims. Thereafter, the applicant and his friend started abusing and assaulting him with their hands and :sts, and also threatened to kill him. The applicant allegedly took out a knife and threatened the complainant. Being frightened by the incident and the threats, the complainant @ed from the spot to save his life. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a report regarding the said incident at Police Station City Kotwali, upon which the police registered FIR No. 719/2025 under Sections 126(2), 296, 115(2), and 351(2) of the BNS, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The police then initiated the investigation, seized the alleged knife, and arrested the applicant/accused on 08.01.2026, and subsequently :led the charge sheet before the learned court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the applicant is the sole breadwinner of his family, and his family will face serious diDculties in livelihood if he is kept in detention. He also submits that the present case has been registered by the police under external pressure from certain organizations/unions, without proper application of mind. At the time of the incident, the applicant was present at Rajiv Plaza to get his mobile phone repaired, and CCTV footage of the same was provided to the police. No prima facie case is made out against the applicant, and the case is based on weak and doubtful evidence. He further submits that the said o=ence has been registered as part of a conspiracy, with mala :de intention, on a false and fabricated story, and due to personal grudge. Hence, the applicant has been falsely and maliciously implicated in the present case. 3 He further submits that the applicant has nine criminal antecedents of a similar nature, which are pending cases, and an explanation in this regard has already been provided in paragraph No. 4(a) of the present bail application. He submits that the applicant has been in jail since 08.01.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial may take some time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail in the present case. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been :led before the competent Court. She further submits that, considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant, he is a habitual o=ender, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 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, that the allegation against the applicant is that he, along with his friend, wrongfully restrained the complainant, abused and assaulted him, and threatened him with a knife, causing the complainant to @ee out of fear, further, though the applicant has nine criminal antecedents of a similar nature, which are pending cases, an explanation in this regard has already been provided in paragraph No. 4(a) of the present bail application, moreover, considering that the charge-sheet has already been :led before the competent Court and the applicant has been in custody since 08.01.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Mohammed Mustakeem @ Sohail, involved in Crime No. 719/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, District 4 Bilaspur (C.G.), for the o=ences punishable under Sections 126(2), 296, 115(2), 351(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 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 :le an undertaking to the e=ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates :xed 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 :xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without suDcient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 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 :xed 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 :xed 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 5 suDcient 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. ODce is directed to provide a certi:ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek