Allowed

Ankit Wasnik @ Anni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Sept 2026MCRC/8154/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh granted regular bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving assaults. The court considered the medical report showing no vital injury, the fact that the co-accused had been liberated, and that the charge-sheet had been filed, releasing him on a personal bond.

What did the court decide?

Granted regular bail on execution of a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety in the like sum, subject to standard bail conditions.

Ankit Wasnik @ Anni Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Bail and Remand | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

CGHC010334922026

¶3

Digitally signed byREKHA SINGH DN: cn=REKHA REKHA SINGH, ou=HIGHCOURT, o=HIGHCOURT OF SINGH CHHATTISGARH,st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.09.17 16:18:57 +0530

¶4

2026:CGHC:40558

¶5

NAFR

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MCRC No. 8154 of 2026

¶8

1 - Ankit Wasnik @ Anni S/o Late Shivkumar Wasnik Aged About 20 Years R/o Ward No.10, Gali No. 01, Ambedkar Chowk, Shanti Nagar Police Chowki Chikhli, P.S. Kotwali Tehsil And District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

¶9

... Applicant

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through -Station House Officer, Police Station Kotwali District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)

¶12

	---Non-applicant
For Applicant	: Mr. Aditya Bharadwaj, Advocate
For Non-applicant	: Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, PL

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶14

Order On Board

¶15

17.09.2026

¶16

1) The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.210/2026 registered at Police Station-Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence under Sections 109(1), 296, 115(2), 351(3), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶17

¶18

2) That, as per the prosecution case, on 14.04.2026, at about 8:45 P.M., the complainant, Virendra @ Saket Yadav, encountered the accused persons near Bajrang Chowk, where, owing to a previous dispute, accused Aman Dongre allegedly abused him. Thereafter, at about 9:00 P.M., when the complainant and Luv Yadav were proceeding towards Chikhli, the accused persons allegedly intercepted them, abused and threatened them, and assaulted the complainant with a bamboo stick. When Luv Yadav intervened to rescue the complainant, the present applicant allegedly took out a knife and attacked him. It is further alleged that the present applicant chased Luv Yadav and inflicted multiple knife blows on his neck, back, waist, shoulder, and other parts of his body. Based on the aforesaid allegations, the police registered the offences, as mentioned above, against the present applicant. Hence, the present application.

¶19

3) Learned counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is not the main coaccused. It is submitted that the Applicant is alleged to have assaulted the complainant with a blunt object, whereas the co-accused is alleged to have assaulted him with a knife. It is further submitted that the Applicant has been in custody since 23.06.2026, the investigation is substantially complete, and there is no likelihood of his absconding. It is contended that the co-accused has already been granted bail in MCRC No. 7706 of 2026 vide order dated 19.08.2026. Hence, he may be released on bail.

¶20

¶21

4) On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court.

¶22

5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶23

6) Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of the allegations, and the medical report, which indicates that the injured has not sustained any injury over any vital part of the body, and further considering that the charge-sheet has been filed and the Applicant is in jail since 23.06.2026, as well as the fact that the co-accused has already been granted bail in MCRC No. 7706 of 2026 vide order dated 19.08.2026, and the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time to conclude, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the application is allowed .

¶24

It is directed that in the event of the applicant executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, he shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

¶25

(i) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court;

¶26

(ii) he shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, &

¶27

¶28

(iii) he shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial.

¶29

The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall decide the case on its

¶30

own merits.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE

¶33

Rekha

Ankit Wasnik @ Anni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Wasnik @ Anni v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases