[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Lakki Yadav @ Lakku vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:16711
MADHURIMA
THAKUR
Digitally signed by NAFR
MADHURIMA
THAKUR
Date: 2026.04.10
17:47:16 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 1623 of 2026
Lakki Yadav @ Lakku S/o Shri Ramayan Yadav Aged About 23 Years
R/o Kumharpara Karbala, Bilaspur, P.S. City Kotwali, District Bilaspur
(C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station City Kotwali, District
Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant : Mr. Ritesh Verma, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
10/04/2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under
Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has
been arrested in connection with Crime No. 687/2025, registered
at Police Station- City Kotwali, District- Bilaspur (CG) for the
offence punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 20.12.2025, on the basis
of a secret information, the police reached near Karbala, Kotu
Chowk, where the applicant was found allegedly brandishing a
sharp-edged knife and threatening passersby. The applicant was
apprehended on the spot and upon being asked to produce valid
documents for possession of the weapon, he failed to do so.
Consequently, an offence under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms
Act was registered. After completion of investigation, the charge-
sheet has been filed and the case is presently fixed for arguments
on charge.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
argued that the applicant was called by the police from his house
on the pretext of obtaining his signature and has been falsely
roped in the case. It is further submitted that the applicant is in
judicial custody since 20.12.2025 and the trial is likely to take
considerable time. It is also submitted that the applicant is a
permanent resident and there is no likelihood of his absconding.
He is ready to abide by all the conditions as may be imposed by
this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and
submits that the applicant has nine criminal antecedents and is a
habitual offender. It is contended that if released on bail, there is a
strong likelihood of the applicant indulging in similar offences
again, thereby affecting public order.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. It is not disputed that the applicant is in judicial custody since
20.12.2025. The charge-sheet has already been filed and the
case is presently at the stage of consideration of charge.
Therefore, further custodial interrogation of the applicant is not
required. Although the applicant has criminal antecedents, it is a
settled principle of law that antecedents alone cannot be the sole
ground to deny bail, particularly when the trial is likely to take
considerable time for its conclusion. The object of bail is to secure
the presence of the accused during trial and not to detain him as a
measure of punishment before conviction.
7. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case,
the nature of allegations, the period of detention, the filing of the
charge-sheet, this Court is of the considered view that it is a fit
case to extend the benefit of bail to the applicant, without
commenting on the merits of the case.
8. Let the Applicant- Lakki Yadav @ Lakku, involved in Crime No.
687/2025, registered at Police Station- City Kotwali, Bilaspur
(C.G.) for the aforesaid offences be released on bail on their
furnishing a personal bond each with two local sureties in the
like sum 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 them under Section 269 of
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of
bail during trial and in order to secure their
presence, proclamation under Section 84 of
BNSS, is issued and the applicant fail 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 Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
(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 BNSS.
If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the
applicants 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 them in accordance with law.
9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for
necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Madhurima
