[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Vivek Gupta @ Gopal Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 February, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:9851
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 1831 of 2026
Vivek Gupta @ Gopal Gupta S/o Shivprasad Gupta Aged About 29 Years
R/o Men Market, Pan Chauraha Ichhawar, Police Station Sehore, District
Sehore (M.P.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Bhatapara, District
Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.
... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
25.02.2026
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') for
grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 256/2025 registered at Police Station
Bhatapara City, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara,, (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 351(3), 353(2), 318(2) and 79
of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 66(d) of the I.T. Act.
2. Case of the prosecution, in nutshell, is that a written complaint was
lodged by the complainant, Anil Gupta, on 12.04.2025. It is alleged
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
Digitally
signed by
RAHUL
DEWANGAN
2
that on the occasion of Hanuman Jayanti, while the complainant
was participating in the puja at the Bal Hanuman Temple, he
received a phone call from an unknown person who threatened that
the complainant and his brother should stay away from Shefali,
failing which both of them would be eliminated and their house
would be set on fire. The caller disclosed his name as Ramgopal
Gupta, stated to be the uncle of the present accused. It is further
alleged that the present applicant has been sending threatening
messages from mobile number 8602417047, using abusive
language during telephonic conversations, and defaming the
complainant's family through messages circulated on WhatsApp
and Facebook. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the FIR
has been registered. Hence, this bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with an
ulterior motive to harass him, and that he has no role whatsoever in
the commission of the alleged offences. It is further submitted that
the applicant has been in a love relationship with Shefali Gupta,
daughter of Prakash Gupta, for the past seven years, and although
Shefali intended to marry the applicant, her uncles, Anish and Sunil,
opposed the said relationship and, on account of such opposition,
have instituted the present false case against him. It is contended
that the entire prosecution case is based solely on oral allegations
without any cogent or independent evidence. He further submits
that, except Section 353(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
the remaining offences under Sections 351(3), 318(2), and 79 of the
3
B.N.S., 2023, and Section 66(d) of the Information Technology Act
are predominantly bailable in nature, and therefore, the continued
incarceration of the applicant is unjustified and contrary to the
settled principles governing grant of bail. He also submits that the
The applicant is a young man aged about 29 years and he has only
one criminal antecedent which is pending, he is in jail since
02.12.2025, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to
take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of
bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the
respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the
charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the
competent Court. She further submits that as per the prosecution
case, the complainant Anil Gupta lodged a written complaint on
12.04.2025 alleging that on the occasion of Hanuman Jayanti, while
he was present at Bal Hanuman Temple for puja, he received a
threatening call from a person who disclosed his name as
Ramgopal Gupta, uncle of the present accused, and threatened to
eliminate the complainant and his brother and to set their house on
fire if they did not stay away from Shefali. It is further submitted that
the present applicant has been continuously sending threatening
messages from mobile number 8602417047, using abusive
language over phone calls, and defaming the complainant's family
through WhatsApp and Facebook, and therefore, considering the
serious nature of the allegations, the applicant is not entitled for
grant of bail.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of offence, the fact that though there are
allegations that the applicant has committed the said crime, but the
applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent which is
pending, the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case and he
is in jail since 02.12.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for
its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled
to be released on bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the Applicant-
Vivek Gupta @ Gopal Gupta, involved in Crime No. 256/2025
registered at Police Station Bhatapara City, District Balodabazar-
Bhatapara,, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections
351(3), 353(2), 318(2) and 79 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
and Section 66(d) of the I.T. Act, be released on bail on his
furnishing a 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 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rahul Dewangan
