Akku Alias Vijay Tripathi vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 15 May, 2025

Chattisgarh High Court

Akku Alias Vijay Tripathi vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 15 May, 2025

Author: Ramesh Sinha

Bench: Ramesh Sinha

                                                            1




                                                                                           NAFR

                                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                                               MCRC No. 2726 of 2025

                        1.

Akku Alias Vijay Tripathi S/o Kedarnath Tripathi Aged About 37 Years
R/o Purani Basti, Masturi Ward No. 13 P.S. Masturi, District Bilaspur
(C.G.)
… Applicant
RAHUL versus
JHA
Digitally signed
by RAHUL JHA
Date: 2025.05.15

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer (S.H.O. ), Police
Station Masturi, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur (C.G.)
17:09:21 +0530

… Non-Applicant

For Applicant : Ms Gunjan Tiwari, Advocate
For Non-Applicant/State : Shri Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate

Hon’ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Order on Board
15.05.2025

1. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant

who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 92/2025 registered

at Police Station – Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offence

punishable under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act.

2. The prosecution’s case is that during police patrolling on 6/2/2025 the

police personnel came to know that the applicant has kept weapon with
2

him and threatening the people. On the basis of which the police

intercepted the applicant while he was waving the edged weapon in the

market area and thereafter after following the due process of law; the

alleged weapon was seized; and arrested the applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has

been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that there

is no independent witness in this case except the Police Constable.

While making the seizure of alleged weapon the dimension of same has

not been mentioned in the seizure memo. The applicant is in detention

since 6/2/2025 and on account of his detention his family members are

suffering a lot as he is the only breadwinner of the family. Learned

counsel would submit that the charge sheet has already been filed and

hence no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose the bail

application of the present applicant and would submit that the applicant

is an habitual offender and more than 20 cases registered against him.

5. At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicant would submit in all the

earlier cases the applicant has been acquitted and only case is pending

against him i.e. Cr.No.292/2024 for offence under Sections 294, 506,

323, 34 of IPC (counter FIR No.291/2024 dated 21/6/2024). In support

of this contention, the affidavit of brother of the applicant has been filed

today along with covering memo.

6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the

case diary.

3

7. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case; submissions

of learned counsel for the parties; particularly considering the fact that

the applicant is in detention since 6/2/2025 and the charge sheet has

already been filed, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case to

enlarge the applicant on bail.

8. Let the Applicant – Akku Alias Vijay Tripathi, involved in Crime No.

92/2025 registered at Police Station – Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.),

for the offence punishable under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act be

released on bail on furnishing 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 and the
4

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. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as early as possible

preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this order.

10. 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
Rahul