SAGAR HEMLA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010292522026 2026:CGHC:38692
NAFR
MANPREET
KAUR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed
by MANPREET
KAUR
Date: 2026.09.01
15:41:02 +0530
MCRC No. 7021 of 2026
Sagar Hemla S/o Shri Sikka Hemla Aged About 42 Years R/o Gangaloor
Base Camp, District : Bijapur, Chhattisgarh
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Geedam, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Manohar Dewangan, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
01.09.2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under
Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)
for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection
with Crime No.56/2026, registered at Police Station- Geedam,
District- Dantewada (C.G.) for the offence punishable under
Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3) and 108 of the BNS.

2
2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant Hemsing
Thakur lodged a written complaint at Police Station Geedam on
25.06.2026 alleging that on the night of 10.06.2026, he and
deceased Tamradhwaj Sahu alias Sonu were travelling from
Bijapur towards Raipur in vehicle No. CG-04-PC-9751 after
loading goods therein. On 11.06.2026, at about 4:00–5:00 p.m.,
when they reached Banjaring Ghat, Geedam, the vehicle driven
by the deceased allegedly met with an accident involving a
Mercedes car bearing registration No. KA-03-MQ-6809 coming
from the opposite direction, resulting in damage to its front
portion. It is alleged that two persons came out of the Mercedes
car, whereupon its driver abused the deceased, demanded
compensation of ₹1 crore on account of the damage caused to
the vehicle, allegedly assaulted him by slapping him and
threatened that, in case the said amount was not paid, he and his
family would be destroyed. Thereafter, at the request of the
deceased, the complainant left the place in another passing
vehicle and proceeded towards Raipur. On the following day, the
complainant was informed by the deceased’s brother, Khileshwar
Sahu, that several videos of the deceased had been uploaded on
Instagram, wherein he was allegedly speaking about the accident
and expressing his intention to die. Subsequently, the complainant
came to know that Tamradhwaj Sahu alias Sonu had committed
suicide by hanging. On the basis of the written complaint, the
present FIR was registered against the applicant, who was

3
thereafter arrested on 26.06.2026.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
contended that in the videos allegedly uploaded by the deceased
on Instagram, the deceased neither took the name of the present
applicant nor alleged that he had been assaulted by the applicant.
On the contrary, the deceased himself stated that he had been
driving under the influence of ganja and was addicted to
intoxicating substances, and, therefore, the extreme step taken by
him was the result of his intoxicated condition and cannot be
attributed to any act of the applicant. It is further submitted that
the applicant is in custody since 26.06.2026, has no criminal
antecedents and, therefore, it is prayed that he be enlarged on
bail.
4.
Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and
submits that there is sufficient material available on record
indicating the involvement of the applicant in the commission of
the alleged offence. It is submitted that the allegations against the
applicant are serious in nature and that the investigation is still
under progress. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence
and the circumstances in which the deceased committed suicide,
learned State counsel prays for rejection of the bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of

4
allegations made against the applicant, the material available on
record, particularly the videos allegedly uploaded by the
deceased, wherein the applicant has not been specifically named
and the deceased is stated to have denied any assault by the
applicant, coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody
since 26.06.2026, has no criminal antecedents and the trial is
likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, this Court is of
the opinion that it is a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .
7. Let applicant, Sagar Hemla , involved in Crime No.56/2026,
registered at Police Station- Geedam, District- Dantewada (C.G.)
for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3) and
108 of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal
bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the
court concerned:-
(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
them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya

5
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 Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Manpreet