IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MANOJ JANGDE URF JAGID – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
CRMP/1413/2026
##PAGE1##
1
2026:CGHC:22946
KUNAL NAFR
DEWANGAN
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DEWANGAN
CRMP No. 1413 of 2026
Manoj Jangde Urf Jagid S/o Purna Ram Aged About 21 Years R/o H-5,
Harsh Pride Mova, Daldal Siwni Mova, Raipur, Distt. Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Civil Lines, Raipur, Distt. Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant : Mr. Arun Kukreja, Advocate.
For Respondent/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
14.05.2026
1. This is an ofÏce reference.
2. Taking into consideration the fact that the first bail application of the
present applicant was earlier rejected on merits and thereafter the
applicant preferred a subsequent bail application before this Court
claiming parity with other co-accused persons, particularly on the basis of
the order dated 13.10.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Criminal Appeal No.4494/2025 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.13678/2025
whereby co-accused Ishika Singh was enlarged on bail, this Court had
##PAGE2##2
granted bail to the applicant vide order dated 01.05.2026 passed in
MCRC No. 4020/2026. However, it has now been brought to the notice of
this Court that after rejection of the earlier bail application, the present
applicant had also approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing SLP
(Crl.) No.21198/2025, which was heard along with a batch of connected
matters, the leading case being Sahil Jethwani vs. State of Chhattisgarh
in SLP (Crl.) No.166/2026, and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide common
order dated 02.04.2026 rejected the bail applications of the similarly
situated co-accused persons including the present applicant, while
directing the concerned trial Court to expedite and conclude the trial
preferably within a period of three months from the date of the said order.
3. Further considering the fact that while preferring the subsequent bail
application before this Court, neither the aforesaid order dated
02.04.2026 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court rejecting the bail
application of the present applicant and other similarly situated co-
accused persons was annexed nor any averment regarding the same was
made in the application and further no submissions in this regard was
advanced, it appears that the material fact relating to rejection of the
applicant’s bail application by the Hon’ble Supreme Court was
intentionally suppressed from this Court while seeking parity with other
co-accused persons.
4. The said suppression of material fact had the effect of misleading
this Court while exercising discretionary jurisdiction under Section 483 of
the BNSS and the order granting bail appears to have been obtained by
playing fraud upon the Court. It is well settled that a litigant approaching
##PAGE3##3
the Court is under a bounden duty to disclose all material and relevant
facts necessary for proper adjudication of the matter.
5. Upon a pointed query being put by this Court to the learned counsel
appearing for the applicant, as to why the fact regarding passing of the
order dated 02.04.2026 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court was not disclosed
before this Court while seeking parity, learned counsel submitted that he
was not aware of the said fact was not informed by the applicant. The
learned counsel has tendered his unconditional apology before this Court.
6. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that
since the applicant himself had approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court
and his bail application stood rejected therein, the said fact was a material
circumstance which ought to have been specifically disclosed before this
Court, nevertheless, in view of the oral unconditional apology tendered by
learned counsel for the applicant, this Court is not inclined to initiate any
separate proceedings against the said counsel.
7. From perusal of the order dated 02.04.2026 passed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in SLP (Crl.) No.166/2026 and connected matters, it
appears that several similarly sit
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.