[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Komal Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:16982
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 1543 of 2026
1.
Komal Singh S/o Bramha Singh Aged About 22 Years Resident of Meera
Colony Bhind, District- Bhind (M.P.)
2. Aryan Singh S/o Chandan Singh Aged About 22 Years Resident of
Village- Ratiyapura Post- Gormi Tahsil- Mohgaon District- Bhind (M.P.)
... Applicants
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station- Sukma,
District- Sukma (C.G.)
... Non-Applicant
For Applicants : Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Digitally
signed by
PREETI
PREETI KUMARI
KUMARI Date:
2026.04.15
Order on Board
10:35:40
+0530
13.04.2026
1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular
bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 95/2025,
registered at Police Station - Sukma, District- Sukma (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 309(6), 311, 332(B), 61(2) and 3(5)of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act.
2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, the complainant, Omprakash Sahu,
lodged a report at Police Station Sukma stating that his jewellery shop is
situated at Ward No. 9, Main Road, Old Bus Stand, Sukma. On
04.12.2025 at about 8:30 PM, two unknown persons entered his shop
and, at the point of a weapon, looted gold and silver ornaments worth
Rs. 11,85,000/- along with cash amounting to Rs. 23,000/-.
3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further
submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and the applicant have no
previous criminal antecedents. He further submitted that the applicants
are in jai since 05.12.2025. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be
enlarged on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the bail application
and submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed. It is further submitted
that the applicants/accused persons, armed with a knife and a pistol,
entered the jewellery shop and, by causing fear and hurt to the
complainant and his family members, committed robbery of valuable gold,
silver, and diamond jewellery, as well as cash. It is further revealed that
the looted jewellery and cash amount have been recovered from the
possession of the applicants/accused persons. Therefore, it is argued
that the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents available on record.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the
nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, and
the period of detention of the applicants in jail since 05.12.2025, and
further considering that the applicants have no previous criminal
antecedents and that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the
competent Court, this Court is of the opinion that the applicants are
entitled to be released on bail in the present case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Nos. 1 and
2 - Komal Singh and Aryan Singh respectively, involved in
Crime No. 95/2025, registered at Police Station - Sukma, District- Sukma
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(6), 311, 332(B),
61(2) and 3(5)of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25, 27 of
Arms Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two
local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court
concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect
that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial
court on each date fixed, either personally or through
their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient
cause, the trial court may proceed against them under
Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure their presence,
proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and
the applicants fails to appear before the court on the
date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall
initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with
law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
(iv) The applicants 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 them 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
Preeti
