AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
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. 87/2026 registered at Police Station – Singhoda, District-Mahasamund (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 109(1), 189, 190, 351, 126, 127 & 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25 of the Arms Act.
Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 07.08.2026, the complainant, Mohd. Mohsin Sheikh, lodged a written complaint at Police Station Singhoda, alleging that in May 2025, he became acquainted with the accused Manish Agrawal through Avesh Memon. The complainant and Avesh Memon made inquiries about the wooden business of Manish Agrawal, as the complainant was also interested in starting such a business. On coming to know about this, Manish Agrawal allegedly threatened the complainant with dire consequences. Thereafter, on 19.05.2025, while the complainant and Avesh Memon were returning from Bargarh to Saraipali in an Ertiga car, Manish Agrawal and his companions allegedly followed and intercepted their vehicle between Chhuipali and Khamharpali. They dragged the complainant and Avesh Memon out of the vehicle and assaulted them with clubs, beer bottles and fists, with the intention to kill them. Somehow, the complainant and Avesh Memon managed to escape from the spot and save their lives. On the basis of the said complaint, the aforesaid offences were registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the name of the applicant was not mentioned in the FIR. Three accused persons have already been granted the benefit of bail by this Court vide order dated 27.10.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 10016 of 2026. He further submits that the applicant is on a better footing than the main accused and is in jail since 02.10.2026. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant. However, he does not dispute that the co-accused persons have already been granted the benefit of bail.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
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, other co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Court in M.Cr.C. No.10016 of 2026 vide order dated 27.10.2026, the applicant has been in jail since 02.10.2026, and the 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.
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-
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.
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.
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.
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.
Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith.