DURGESH NISHAD vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010328812026 2026:CGHC:38334

NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 7966 of 2026
Durgesh Nishad S/o Ashok Nishad Aged About 23 Years R/o, Lalkhadan
Kenwatpara, P.S. Torwa, District Bilaspur (C.G.)
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Sirgitti District Bilaspur
(C.G.)
... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Patel, Advocate
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
31.08.2026
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for
grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 276/2025 registered at Police Station-
Sirgitti, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under
Sections 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged
a written report stating that on 20.05.2025, he had gone to
RAHUL Devrikhurd on his motorcycle bearing registration No.
DEWANGAN
Digitally
signed by
RAHUL
DEWANGAN

2
CG-10/BN/1522 to meet his friends. While returning home at night,
he felt sleepy and, therefore, parked his motorcycle and fell asleep
under the Chuhchuhiyapara Overbridge near a vegetable shop. It is
further alleged that when he woke up the following morning, he
found that his motorcycle was missing. On the basis of the said
report, the police registered the First Information Report (FIR) and
commenced investigation. During the course of investigation, the
present applicant was arrested for his alleged involvement in the
commission of the offence. Upon completion of the investigation, the
police filed the charge-sheet before the learned competent Court,
and the applicant is presently in judicial custody. Hence, the present
bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is
innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
submitted that even if the allegations contained in the prosecution
case are taken at their face value, there is no direct or specific
material to establish the applicant’s involvement in the alleged theft
of motorcycle bearing registration No. CG-10/BN/1522. He further
submits that there is no eyewitness to the alleged incident, as the
complainant himself had stated that he parked his motorcycle under
the Chuhchuhiyapara Overbridge and went to sleep, and came to
know about its alleged theft only on the following morning, thus, the
identity of the person who allegedly committed the theft is not
established from the complaint itself. It is further submitted that the
applicant has been arrested on the basis of the investigation
conducted by the police and there is no direct or independent

3
evidence connecting him with the alleged offence. He also submits
that the alleged criminal antecedent of the applicant arises from a
memorandum recorded in the present case, pursuant to which a
separate FIR was registered in respect of another allegedly stolen
scooty, however, the said scooty has not been recovered and,
therefore, such FIR ought not to be treated as an independent
criminal antecedent for the purpose of considering the applicant’s
prayer for bail. It is further submitted that the applicant has three
criminal antecedent under the IPC, out of which only one case is
pending. He further submits that the charge-sheet has been filed
before the competent Court, he is in jail since 30.06.2026 and the
trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he
prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail
application and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted
before the competent Court. He further submits that the allegation
against the applicant is of theft of motorcycle bearing registration
No. CG-10/BN/1522, which was found missing from the place
where the complainant had parked it while he was asleep. It is
further submitted that the applicant has been arrested during the
course of investigation on the basis of the material collected by the
police connecting him with the alleged offence, and the absence of
an eyewitness, in the facts of the present case, cannot by itself be a
ground for granting bail. He further submits that the applicant has
three criminal antecedent under the IPC, and his conduct is
therefore required to be taken into consideration. It is also submitted

4
that the contentions regarding the memorandum and the non-
recovery of the other vehicle are matters relating to appreciation of
evidence and cannot be conclusively adjudicated at the stage of
bail. Hence, he prays for rejection of the bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the case diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the
submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the
material available on record, though the allegation against the
applicant is that he was involved in the theft of motorcycle bearing
registration No. CG-10/BN/1522, which had been parked by the
complainant under the Chuhchuhiyapara Overbridge while he was
asleep, but also considering the fact that there is no eyewitness to
the alleged theft, the applicant is languishing in jail since
30.06.2026, the applicant has three criminal antecedent under the
IPC, out of which only one case is pending, which has been
explained by learned counsel for the applicant, and the charge-
sheet has been submitted before the competent Court and the
conclusion of the trial may take some more time, without expressing
any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered
view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular
bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the
applicant - Durgesh Nishad, involved in Crime No. 276/2025
registered at Police Station- Sirgitti, District - Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the

5
offence punishable under Sections 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a
personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum 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

6
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
forthwith
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Rahul Dewangan