Dismissed

Takeshwar @ Taakeshwar Nishad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2026MCRC/8531/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court of Chhattisgarh order rejects the second bail application of the applicant. The court held that there was no change in circumstances since the first bail application was dismissed on merits, noting a dispute evolution into an attempt to commit mischief with a knife.

What did the court decide?

The instant application for the grant of bail is rejected.

Takeshwar @ Taakeshwar Nishad Vs State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

CGHC010350972026

2026:CGHC:40175

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.09.15 17:59:14 +0530

¶7

MCRC No. 8531 of 2026

¶8

Takeshwar @ Taakeshwar Nishad S/o Shatruhan Nishad Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No. 06, Nevra Mandi Chowk, P.S. Tilda-Nevra, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶9

... Applicant

¶10

versus

¶11

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station TildaNevra, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶12

... Non-Applicant

¶13

For Applicant : Mr. Mayank Chandrakar, Advocate For State : Mr. Keshav Gupta, Government Advocate

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

15.09.2026

¶17

This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 243/2025 registered at Police Station TildaNevra, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 109(1) of B.N.S. 2023 and Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act.

¶18

The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 9129 of 2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.11.2025.

¶19

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant has made complaint to the concerned police station alleging inter-alia that on the date of incident there was simple dispute arose in between applicant and

¶20

¶21

complainant regarding previous enmity and thereafter, the applicant has committed marpeet with the complainant by knife, resultant, the complainant has received simple injury. Based upon the such complaint concerned police has been registered crime against the applicant for the aforesaid offences.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the present applicant has falsely been implicated. He further submits that after rejection of the first bail application 7 witnesses have been examined out of 10 witnesses and there are contradictions and omissions in their evidence. He would further submit that the present applicant is in jail since 09.06.2025, charge sheet has also been filed and it will take time to conclude the trial. Thus, he would pray for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶23

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the bail application. She would further submit that there is no change in circumstances and thus, the application is liable to be rejected.

¶24

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶25

First bail application was dismissed on merits & there is no change in circumstance and further considering the allegations leveled against the present applicant, I am not inclined to allow this application. Accordingly, the instant application for the grant of bail is rejected .

¶26

Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE

¶27

$iddhant

Takeshwar @ Taakeshwar Nishad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Takeshwar @ Taakeshwar Nishad 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