DEEPAK KUMAR ANANT vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010336382026 2026:CGHC:38828
NAFR
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
MCRC No. 8116 of 2026
Deepak Kumar Anant S/o Jagdish Prasad Anant Aged About 34 Years
R/o L I G- 01/84, Dhacha Bhawan, Kurud, Police Station, Jamul, District-
Durg (C.G.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Jamul, District- Durg (C.G.)
... Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicant : Mr. Virendra Kashyap, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
02.09.2026
1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of
regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.
418/2026, registered at Police Station Jamul, District Durg (C.G.)
for the offences punishable under Sections 105 and 110 of the
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 146/196, 3/181, 5/180
and 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
2.
The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 16.06.2026 at about 5:30

2
p.m., Shivdayal Kashyap was returning on his bicycle after visiting a
construction site when, near Siskol Company, Rajiv Nagar, he was
allegedly hit by a Tata Ace vehicle bearing registration No.
CG-07/CY-5936. It is alleged that the applicant, who was driving
the said vehicle, was driving it in a rash and negligent manner and
caused the accident, as a result of which Shivdayal Kashyap
sustained serious injuries on his head, hands and legs and
succumbed to the injuries at the spot. On the basis of the report
lodged by Umesh Kashyap, Crime No. 418/2026 was initially
registered at Police Station Jamul for the offences punishable under
Section 106 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 184 of the
Motor Vehicles Act. During investigation, Sections 105 and 110 of
the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 146/196, 3/181 and 5/180
of the Motor Vehicles Act were added. It is further alleged that the
offending vehicle was not covered by a valid insurance policy and
the applicant was not possessing a valid driving licence. The
applicant was arrested on 18.06.2026 and after completion of
investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the competent
Court.
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 the alleged incident was a road traffic accident and
there is no allegation of any previous enmity, motive or intentional
act on the part of the applicant to cause the death of the deceased.
It is further submitted that the FIR was initially registered under
Section 106 of the BNS and Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act

3
and Sections 105 and 110 of the BNS were subsequently added
during investigation. Learned counsel further submits that the
investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already
been filed before the competent Court; therefore, no further
custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. The applicant
has no criminal antecedents and has been in custody since
18.06.2026. It is also submitted that trial is likely to take some time
for its conclusion therefore, he prays for grant of bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for
grant of bail and submits that the applicant, while driving the
offending Tata Ace vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, caused
an accident resulting in serious and fatal injuries to Shivdayal
Kashyap, who died at the spot. He further submits that the offending
vehicle was not covered by a valid insurance policy and the
applicant was not possessing a valid driving licence at the relevant
time. However, he does not dispute that the investigation has been
completed, the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent
Court and the applicant has no criminal antecedents.
5.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case
diary as well as the material available on record.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant
and further considering that the alleged incident arose out of a road
traffic accident, the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the
investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already

4
been filed before the competent Court and further considering the
period of detention of the applicant since 18.06.2026, coupled with
the fact that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I
am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant.
7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed .
8. Let applicant, Deepak Kumar Anant, involved in Crime No.
418/2026, registered at Police Station Jamul, District Durg (C.G.)
for the offences punishable under Sections 105 and 110 of the
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 146/196, 3/181, 5/180
and 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond with two 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

5
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 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.
9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial
Court concerned for necessary information and compliance
forthwith.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Kunal