Chattisgarh High Court
Rishabh Paikara vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:13171
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2610 of 2026
Rishabh Paikara S/o Bhagwat Paikara, Aged About 21 Years R/o Magarchaba,
Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Office, Police of Police
Station Palari, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandra, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
Digitally signed
by ABHISHEK
19.03.2026
ABHISHEK SHRIVAS
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.03.19
18:20:42 +0530
1.This is the First bail application filed 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. 472/2025 registered at Police Station : Palari, District Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(2), 109(1) and 111 read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, is that on 16.11.2025, the complainant made a written complaint stating therein that on 13.11.2025, he was going from Palari to Khartora with his friend, namely Bisambhar, and at about 3:30 to 3:45 PM, when they reached between Village 2 Ghotiya and Village Kusmi, six persons came on two motorcycles, assaulted the complainant with a knife, and snatched his mobile phone before fleeing from the spot. On the basis of the said complaint, the police registered the crime, and during the investigation, the present applicant along with other accused persons was arrested and a charge- sheet has been filed before the concerned Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that besides the above, the evidence collected by the prosecution does not prima facie disclose a sufficient case to hold the applicant guilty of the aforesaid offences. The alleged incident took place on 13.11.2025, whereas the FIR was lodged on 16.11.2025, and there is no explanation mentioned in the FIR for such delay, which indicates that the story narrated by the complainant is false and fabricated, with an intention to implicate the applicant in a false case. He also submits that even if the prosecution story is taken at its face value, the allegation against the applicant is only that he procured the knife online and handed it over to his friend, who in turn gave the said knife to the main accused, therefore, no direct role is attributed to the applicant in the commission of the offence. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 18.11.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.
4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 3
6. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of offence and further the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, further, the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has been in jail since 18.11.2025, the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Let applicant, Rishabh Paikara, involved in Crime No. 472/2025 registered at Police Station : Palari, District Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(2), 109(1) and 111 read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(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 him 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 4 under Section 84 of BNSS. 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 209 of the 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek