[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Nilesh Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 22 April, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:18393
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 3634 of 2026
Nilesh Sahu S/o Ramu Sahu Aged About 19 Years R/o Shiv Mandir Chowk,
Ward No. 9, Kandul, P.S. Mujgahan, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Mujgahan, Distt.
Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Animesh Shukla, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
Digitally signed
22.04.2026
by ABHISHEK
ABHISHEK SHRIVAS
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.04.23
11:35:36 +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. 18/2026 registered
at Police Station Mujgahan, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offences
punishable under Section 303(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS).
2. As per the prosecution, the case in brief is that the complainant had
parked his vehicle outside his godown at around 7:00 AM on 24.01.2026.
When he returned at around 11:00 AM, he discovered that his vehicle
had been stolen from the place where it was parked. Subsequently, an
FIR was registered against unknown accused persons on 25.01.2026.
Thereafter, upon completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed
before the Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has
been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the
investigation in the present case is complete, and the charge-sheet has
already been filed before the learned trial Court. Therefore, custodial
interrogation of the applicant/accused is no longer required. That no
purpose would be served by the continued incarceration of the applicant,
as the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution has
already been collected and forms part of the charge-sheet. He submits
that the applicant is no longer required for any investigative purpose, and
his further detention would be wholly unjustified, unwarranted, and
contrary to the settled principles of criminal jurisprudence. He also
submits that it is a settled proposition of law that once the investigation is
complete and the charge-sheet has been filed, the accused should not be
kept in judicial custody for an indefinite period, especially when the trial is
likely to take considerable time. He submits that the present applicant
has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 28.01.2026,
conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant
of regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of
the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already
been submitted before the competent Court in the present 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 and
the fact that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents,
furthermore, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the
competent Court in the present case and the applicant has been
languishing in jail since 28.01.2026, conclusion of the trial may take
some more time, therefore, this Court is of the view that the applicant is
entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Let the Applicant - Nilesh Sahu, involved in Crime No. 18/2026
registered at Police Station Mujgahan, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the
offences punishable under Section 303(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
(BNS), 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 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 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 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
