[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Rishabh Paikara vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:13171
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2610 of 2026
Rishabh Paikara S/o Bhagwat Paikara, Aged About 21 Years R/o Magarchaba,
Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Office, Police of Police
Station Palari, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Yogesh Kumar Chandra, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
Digitally signed
by ABHISHEK
19.03.2026
ABHISHEK SHRIVAS
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.03.19
18:20:42 +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. 472/2025 registered
at Police Station : Palari, District Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 309(2), 109(1) and 111 read with
section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, is that on 16.11.2025, the
complainant made a written complaint stating therein that on 13.11.2025,
he was going from Palari to Khartora with his friend, namely Bisambhar,
and at about 3:30 to 3:45 PM, when they reached between Village
Ghotiya and Village Kusmi, six persons came on two motorcycles,
assaulted the complainant with a knife, and snatched his mobile phone
before fleeing from the spot. On the basis of the said complaint, the
police registered the crime, and during the investigation, the present
applicant along with other accused persons was arrested and a charge-
sheet has been filed before the concerned Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent
and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that
besides the above, the evidence collected by the prosecution does not
prima facie disclose a sufficient case to hold the applicant guilty of the
aforesaid offences. The alleged incident took place on 13.11.2025,
whereas the FIR was lodged on 16.11.2025, and there is no explanation
mentioned in the FIR for such delay, which indicates that the story
narrated by the complainant is false and fabricated, with an intention to
implicate the applicant in a false case. He also submits that even if the
prosecution story is taken at its face value, the allegation against the
applicant is only that he procured the knife online and handed it over to
his friend, who in turn gave the said knife to the main accused, therefore,
no direct role is attributed to the applicant in the commission of the
offence. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and
he is in jail since 18.11.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time,
therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant.
4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of
the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has 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. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, nature and gravity of
offence and further the fact that the applicant has no criminal
antecedents, further, the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the
present case before the competent Court and the present applicant has
been in jail since 18.11.2025, the trial is likely to take sometime for its
conclusion, therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to
be released on bail in this case.
7. Let applicant, Rishabh Paikara, involved in Crime No. 472/2025
registered at Police Station : Palari, District Baloda-Bazar-Bhatapara
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 309(2), 109(1) and 111
read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released
on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like
amount 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court
concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Abhishek
