[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Abhay Raksel vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 27 February, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
GOURI
MUDALIAR
Digitally signed by
GOURI MUDALIAR 2026:CGHC:10302
Date: 2026.02.28
14:48:50 +0530
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2051 of 2026
Abhay Raksel, Aged About 19 Years, S/o Bharat Raksel R/o Marhi Mata
Mandir Near Mekahara Hospital Current Address- Near Talab Par
Rajbandha Maidaan, p/s Moudhapara Raipur C.G.
... Applicant
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- p/s Moudhapara Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondent
For Applicant : Shri Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate (through
VC)
For : Shri Sourabh Sahu, PL.
Respondent/State
For complainant : Shri Prakhar Dutt, Advocate.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
27/02/2026
1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail
to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime
No.123/2025 registered at Police Station Moudhapara, Raipur,
C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 296,
115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS r/w section 25 and 27 of the Arms
Act (As per the charge sheet)
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 28.06.25, the applicant
along with other co-accused had assaulted the injured Ehsaan
using knife. Based upon such information, FIR bearing crime
no.123/25 u/s 109(1), 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS was
registered. Later, the applicant was arrested on 29.06.2025 and
his memorandum statement was recorded, and a knife was
recovered therefore, offence u/s 25 and 27 of the Arms Act was
added.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this is the second
bail application of the applicant and the first bail application of the
applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated
06/11/2025 in MCRC No.8861/2025. He would submit that the
statement of the injured has already been recorded by the trial
court but he has not identified the applicant in commission of
crime. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since
29/06/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore,
he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail
application.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has no objection for grant of
bail to the applicant.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
7. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second
bail application of the applicant and the first bail application of the
applicant was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dated
06/11/2025 in MCRC No.8861/2025. Considering the fact that
statement of the injured has already been recorded by the trial
court but he has not identified the applicant in commission of
crime, applicant is in jail since 29/06/2025 and trial is likely to take
some time for its conclusion, therefore this Court is of the view
that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
8. Accordingly, the second bail application is allowed and it is
directed that the Applicant- Abhay Raksel, involved in Crime
No.123/2025 registered at Police Station Moudhapara, Raipur,
C.G. for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 296,
115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS r/w section 25 and 27 of the Arms
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.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. -
Sd/-S Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
CHIEF JUSTICE
gouri
