[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Praveen Kumar Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 February, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:9849
NAFR
KUNAL
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DEWANGAN
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
MCRC No. 1897 of 2026
1 - Praveen Kumar Yadav S/o Baratu Yadav Aged About 20 Years R/o
Shanti Vihar Colony, Torwa Police Station- Torwa, District Bilaspur C.G.
2 - Akhilesh Das Manikpuri S/o Shiv Kumar Manikpuri Aged About 20
Years R/o Hemu Nagar, Near Chandan Pan Thela, Police Station- Torwa,
District Bilaspur C.G.
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station-
Torwa, District Bilaspur C.G.
... Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicants : Mr. Vikas Singh, Advocate
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, 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
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail
to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime
No. 430/2025 registered at Police Station- Torwa, District- Bilaspur
(C.G.), for the offence punishable under Section 309(6) of BNS.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 23.09.2025, the
complainant, Mehandi Hasan, was travelling by train from Howrah
to Bilaspur. When the complainant reached near Hemunagar
Overbridge, an unknown person allegedly assaulted him on his
hand and snatched his mobile phone. The report to the above effect
was lodged by the complainant at Police Station Torwa, where an
FIR was registered against unknown persons. During the course of
investigation, the applicants along with the co-accused were
arrested on 24.09.2025.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the applicants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
submitted that the co-accused persons on similar allegations have
already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025
in M.Cr.C. Nos. 8605/2025 and 9650/2025 and therefore the
present applicants are also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. It
is further submitted that applicant No.1 has one criminal antecedent
and applicant No.2 also has one criminal antecedent under the
Arms Act, however, the same does not disentitle them from grant of
bail. Accordingly, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants.
4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the
State/non-applicant opposes the bail application and submits that in
the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent
Court and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicants are
concerned, the applicants have one criminal antecedents each
further from the possession of the applicants, one mobile phone has
been recovered. Accordingly, the present applicants are 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, period of detention of the applicants
since 24.09.2025 and recovery made from them and the fact that in
the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent
Court and the applicants have one previous criminal antecedent
each and no further interrogation is required and the trial is likely to
take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without further
commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the
applicants
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants is allowed.
8. Let the applicants - Praveen Kumar Yadav and Akhilesh Das
Manikpuri, involved in Crime No. 430/2025 registered at Police
Station- Torwa, District- Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence punishable
under Section 309(6) of BNS, be released on bail on their furnishing
a personal bond with two 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 their 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 fail 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 applicants are
deliberated 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 certified copy of this order to the trial
Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith.
- S/- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Kunal
