Manish Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

This is Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for grant of regular bail to applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.65/2025, registered at PS –Singhoda, Distt. Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh, for commission of offence punishable under Sections 20(B), 29(1) of NDPS Act; Sections 281, 125(A), 303(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

¶15

2

¶16

First bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn on 03.12.2025 in MCRC No.9262/2025.

¶17

Case of prosecution, in brief, is that on 07/08/2025 information about an accident was received via mobile phone on Dial 112; upon receiving the information, police constables numbered 261, 743, 807, 612, and 333, who were in the Dial 112 vehicle, proceeded towards Kharniabahal village, where driver of black and white Scorpio vehicle bearing registration number CG 12/BF-4655, driving rashly and negligently, hit a Heго Splendor motorcycle, causing an accident in which the motorcycle driver Digambar Patel, sustained serious injuries. The Ertiga car bearing registration number CG 04/LM-0358, which was acting as a pilot vehicle for the Scorpio, was also intercepted and apprehended. Upon checking both vehicles, 6 stolen goats, 3 stolen male goats, one iron dagger, and a total of 30.0 kg of cannabis were found. These items were seized by the police in the presence of witnesses. During questioning, it was revealed that the cannabis was brought from Melchamunda village, Odisha, and the goats and male goats were stolen. In addition to the accused/Sultan Khan, who was in the Scorpio vehicle, three other people were apprehended, and three people in the Ertiga car were also arrested by the police. When all the accused were given notices under Section 179 of the Indian Citizen Security Code to produce documents related to the possession of the said items, they stated that they did not have any documents. Based upon the seizure, FIR was registered against the accused person for the alleged crime/offence.

¶18

3

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. Neither any seizure has been made from the applicant nor he has been named in the First Information Report. Further, there is no call detail record or any other data produced by the prosecution to establish that the present applicant, in any manner, contacted or communicated with the other co-accused persons. Co-accused/Sultan Khan, who is juvenile has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17-11-2025. The essential ingredients of alleged offence is not prima-facie attracted against the applicant. The applicant is not available on the spot at the time of alleged incident nor his name is mentioned in the Second Information Report. Applicant has been implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion and memorandum of the other accused persons. There is no any other previous criminal antecedent against the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 11-082025, charge sheet has been filed, conclusion of trial may take some time, hence, he may be released on bail.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that there is specific allegation against the applicant of committing the aforesaid offence/crime, hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶22

Considering facts of the case, nature of allegations, submission of learned counsel for parties, the fact that neither cannabis or any other incriminating material/articles has been seized from the

¶23

4

¶24

applicant nor he has been named in the First Information Report, there is no call detail record or any other data produced by the prosecution to establish that the present applicant, in any manner, contacted or communicated with the other co-accused persons, further considering that co-accused/Sultan Khan, who is juvenile has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17-11-2025, there is no any other previous criminal antecedent against the applicant, applicant is in jail since 11-08-2025, charge sheet has been filed, conclusion of trial may take some time, hence, he may be released on bail.

¶25

Accordingly, bail application is allowed. It is directed that applicant shall be released on regular bail, on his furnishing a bail bond in sum of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in like sum to satisfaction of concerned Court on the conditions that-

¶26

a) applicant 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.

¶27

b) applicant shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, and

¶28

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

¶29

Certified copy as per rules.

¶30

Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge

¶31

J.

Manish Kumar Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Drithlehre Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited

Heeralal Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anil Kumar Shrivas Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Premnath Joshi (wrongly mentioned as Premkant Joshi in notice) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ishwarlal Sahu Vs the State of Chhattisgarh