Dismissed

Malvendra Banerjee v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2026MCRC/4315/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismissed the bail application of an applicant apprehending a murder charge and vehicular offence. The High Court of Chhattisgarh held that credibility of witnesses cannot be examined at the bail stage, rejecting the mini-trial argument despite the prosecution complainant not supporting the case, noting that other witnesses and the fact of the vehicle crush supported the prosecution.

What the court decided

AI extract

Malvendra Banerjee Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

SATISH TUMANE

NAFR

Digitally signed by SATISH TUMANE Date: 2026.09.18 16:00:18 +0530

¶5

CGHC010175692026

¶6

2026:CGHC:40269

¶7

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶8

MCRC No.4315 of 2026

¶9

Malvendra Banerjee S/o Vasudev Banerjee Aged About 26 Years Resident Of Ward No.13 Saja Tahsil and Police Station Saja District- Bemetara Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Applicant (In Jail)

¶11

versus

¶12

State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer Of Police StationSaja District- Bemetara Chhattisgarh

¶13

... Respondent(s)

¶14

For Applicant : Shri Shubhankar Singh, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri Keshav Prasad Gupta, Govt. Advocate

¶15

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶16

Order on Board

¶17

15/09/2026

¶18

Heard.

¶19

This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.162/2025, registered at Police Station Saja, District Bemetara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 109(1) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Section 183 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶20

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that in the night of June 29, 2025, at around 8:30 PM, when the complainant-Shankar Lal Yadav and Ratnu Netam were consuming alcohol near Sethain Talab Pachri,

¶21

¶22

Ward No.13, Saja, the accused-Malvendra Banerjee approached them and argument ensued with regard to unpaid wages. The accused refused to make payment of wages and insulted them too and also threatened them for dire consequences. Later that night, the complainant and Ratnu Netam met Naresh Nishad, and when they were walking towards liquor shop, the accused-Malvendra Banerjee arrived there in his White Bolero Registration No. CG-25-2246 in a high speed and intentionally struck them with a intention to kill. It is also alleged that the applicant drove his vehicle forward and backward two to three times and crushed the deceased-Ratnu Netam. On such a complaint the police has registered the offence against the applicant as stated in the opening para.

¶23

Learned counsel for the applicant would argue that the complainant has not supported the case of the prosecution. It is also contend that the ingredients of Section 103(1) of the BNS are not available. It is also submitted that even the entire case of the prosecution is accepted, the offence committed by the present applicant would not travel beyond the scope of Section 106 of the BNS. It is also argued that the investigation in this case is complete, charge sheet has been filed and the trial would likely to take some more time, whereas the applicant is in jail since 30.06.2025, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶24

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that on the date of incident, the applicant, who was the owner of the offending vehicle, intentionally crushed the deceased-Ratnu Netam and also hit the complainant and Naresh Nishad. He would further submit that there are serious allegations

¶25

¶26

against the applicant, therefore, the bail application deserves to be rejected.

¶27

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all the documents available on record.

¶28

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the allegation made against the present applicant and further considering the fact that though the complainant has not supported the case of the prosecution, but he has not denied the factum of incident and other witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and further considering the fact that the deceased was crushed by the vehicle, which was being driven by the present applicant, therefore, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

¶29

It is well settled principles of law that credibility of evidence of the witnesses cannot be examined while entertaining the bail application. The mini trial is not permissible at this stage.

¶30

9. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant fails and is hereby dismissed.

¶31

SD/(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶32

Tumane

Malvendra Banerjee v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Malvendra Banerjee v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases