MCRC/8506/2026 of ARVIND KUMAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 11 October 2026

1. Applicant has filed this first bail application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 121/2026 registered at Police Station – Banki, Mongra, District Korba (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 127(2), 127(8), 3(5) & 309(6) of the BNS.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Sanjay Kenwat, alleged that his Scorpio vehicle bearing registration No. CG-12-BN-9335 was booked by three unidentified persons, who were conversing in the Chhattisgarhi dialect, on the pretext of travelling to Sihor, Madhya Pradesh. An advance amount of Rs. 1,500/- was transferred to him through PhonePe.

However, when the vehicle reached the designated location, the said persons allegedly assaulted the complainant and forcibly robbed him of the vehicle. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant, Police Station Banki Mongra, District Korba (C.G.), registered Crime No. 121/2026.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the applicant and his brother, Pankaj Pal, intended to purchase a second-hand vehicle and, in that connection, came into contact with Sachin Kenwat and Himanshu Kenwat. He further submits that, at the time of his arrest, the applicant was found in possession of the vehicle and its keys, which had been handed over to him by Sachin Kenwat for inspection. He further submits that the applicant is 21 years of age, has been in jail since 04.06.2026, and has no criminal antecedents. He also submits that no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and that the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, learned counsel prays that the applicant be released on bail.

4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the vehicle was seized from the possession of the applicant. However, he does not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was arrested when he was taking possession of the vehicle and its keys from the co-accused who absconded. He further submits that the other co-accused persons are absconding and charge-sheet against the applicant has been filed and applicant has no previous criminal antecedents.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the allegations, submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties, the charge-sheet has already been filed, applicant has no criminal antecedents, and he has been in jail since 04.06.2026, trial is likely to take some time, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to allow this application for grant of bail.

7. Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that the applicant shall be released on regular bail, upon furnishing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in like sum to the satisfaction of the Court on the conditions that- (a) 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.

(b) 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.

(c) 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.

(d) 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 for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu)

JUDGE vaibhav