Chhattisgarh High Court
MCRC/8202/2026 of GUNESHWAR PRASAD TIWARI Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 8 September 2026
2026:CGHC:39607 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8202 of 2026 Guneshwar Prasad Tiwari S/o Late Bisahu Ram Tiwari Aged About 60 Years Police Station Sarkanda, R/o Rajiv Vihar, Lingiyadih, Bilaspur, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh
CGHC010341772026
2026:CGHC:39607
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 8202 of 2026
Guneshwar Prasad Tiwari S/o Late Bisahu Ram Tiwari Aged About 60 Years Police Station Sarkanda, R/o Rajiv Vihar, Lingiyadih, Bilaspur, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Applicant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, The Police Station Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Distt- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---Non-applicant
For respective Applicants
:
Mr. Raviker Patel, Advocates.
For Non-applicant/State
:
Mr. Ashish Shukla, Dy. A.G.
SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD
09.09.2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This is the first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 940/2026 registered at Police Station – Sarkanda District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4),338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a written complaint before the concerned Police Station alleging that the accused persons had received a total amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- under the Government Snakebite/Poisonous Animal Bite Death Assistance by presenting wrong facts and Scheme thereby causing wrongful gain to themselves. On the basis of the said written complaint, the police registered the offence against the applicant.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that there is an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR, the applicant neither received any benefit nor committed the alleged offence, and has been implicated merely on the basis of suspicion and a memorandum statement. He has been in custody since 19.06.2026, and the co-accused has already been granted bail. Hence, the applicant may also be enlarged on bail.
4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is alleged to have received a total amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- under the Government Snakebite/Poisonous Animal Bite Death Assistance Scheme, thereby causing wrongful gain to himself. He further submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed and applicant has one criminal antecedent.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents filed along with the bail application.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, charge-sheet has already been filed, the period of pre-trial detention suffered by the applicant since 19.06.2026, 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, the bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is allowed and it is directed that applicant shall be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of Trial Court concerned 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 andin order to secure her 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 concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Vaibhav