1 CGHC010368452026 2026:CGHC:43521 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8911 of 2026 1 - Ramjan Sheikh S/o Aabid Sheikh Aged About 21 Years R/o New Nehru Nagar, P.S. Odkeshwar, District Nagpur, Maharashtra ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through S H O, P.S. Kumhari, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Shri B.P. Singh, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Shri Sourabh Sharma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 7.10.2026 1) This is the first bail application filed under under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.144 of 2026 registered at Police Station Kumhari, District Durg, Chhattisgarh for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 221 & 3(5) of BNS and Sections 184 & 100 of MV Act. NIRMALA RAO 2 2) As per the case of the prosecution, on 15.5.2026, the complainant, Constable Ramesh Chandrakar, was on traffic duty near Kumhari Toll Plaza. At that time, a vehicle bearing registration No. MH-02-AY-3475, having black sunshades on the windows, was being driven at a high speed. He tried to stop the said vehicle, but the present applicant, who was driving the car, increased its speed and attempted to dash against him with an intention to cause his death. The complainant moved back to save his life and sustained injuries to the fingers of his right hand. A written complaint was lodged on 15.5.2026, and consequently, the aforesaid offences were registered against the applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He would contend that the applicant had stopped his vehicle and the Constable was demanding a bribe, and when the applicant refused to pay the same, a false FIR was lodged against him. He would further submit that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has been in jail since 15.5.2026, he has no criminal antecedents, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the present applicant, who was driving the car, increased its speed and attempted to dash against the on-duty Constable, as a result of which the Constable sustained injuries. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to grant of bail. 3 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has been in jail since 15.5.2026, he has no criminal antecedents, and the injured complainant sustained simple injuries, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 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