1. Applicants seek regular bail for offences involving alleged unauthorized use of a motor vehicle registration number. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 31854
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J
Rohit Kumar Kankariya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
MCRC No. 9324 of 2026
Important Points
The court granted regular bail based on the nature of the offence, the role of the applicants, the fact that the charge-sheet had not yet been filed, and the duration of their judicial custody.
Subject
Criminal - Bail
Act Referred
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: S.483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: S.340(2), S.345(3), S.347(1), S.336(3)
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: S.340(2), S.345(3), S.347(1), S.336(3)
Headnote
(A) Criminal Law - Bail - Grant of regular bail - Consideration of nature of offence, role of accused, and period of custody - Where the charge-sheet is not yet filed and the accused have been in custody for a significant period, bail may be granted without commenting on the merits. (Para 6)
Issues: Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
Issues: Whether the applicants are entitled to regular bail considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Avinash Chand Sahu
For the Respondents: Vivek Sharma
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Avinash Chand Sahu
For the Respondents: Vivek Sharma
Table of Contents
2. Applicants argue innocence and lack of involvement in the alleged forgery, while the State opposes bail citing active roles of the accused and existing criminal antecedents. (Para 3 , 4 )
3. The court observed the nature and gravity of the offence, the length of incarceration, the status of the investigation, and the varying criminal antecedents of the applicants. (Para 5 , 6 )
4. Regular bail may be granted considering the pending investigation, the duration of judicial custody, and the absence or age of prior criminal antecedents. (Para 6 )
5. The bail application is allowed, subject to the applicants furnishing a personal bond and surety, and complying with specified conduct conditions. (Para 7 , 8 )
6. What factors justify the grant of regular bail, particularly when a charge-sheet has not yet been filed?
The court considers the nature and gravity of the offence, the role of the accused, the period of judicial custody, the likelihood of a protracted trial, and the history of criminal antecedents. (Para 6 )
7. How do prior criminal antecedents influence the court's discretion in granting regular bail?
The court balances the presence of past criminal antecedents against their vintage and the individual circumstances of the case, determining whether such history necessitates the denial of bail despite other favorable factors. (Para 3 , 4 , 6 )
Order on Board
1. The applicants have preferred this first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail as they has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 600/2026 registered at Police Station Mohan Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections340(2), 345(3), 347(1) and 336(3) of BNS.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that complainant Monish Soni lodged a written complaint on 24/08/2026 to the effect that the registration number of his vehicle (car) was being misused by an unknown person. On the basis of the said complaint, FIR was registered and during the course of investigation, police found that applicant No. 2 Anup Rawalani was owner of a vehicle Toyota Yaris bearing Registration No. CG-07-BJ-5256 and he had borrowed an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- from applicant No.1 Rohit Kumar Kankariya and had kept the aforesaid vehicle with as security. Subsequently, in the year 2023, co-accused Vijay Sen approached applicant No.1 with a proposal to purchase the vehicle. Applicant No.1 informed him that the vehicle was not registered with the RTO. Co-accused Vijay Sen assured applicant No.1 that he would get the vehicle registered at RTO, Durg, after obtaining the requisite consent. On such assurance, applicant No.1 handed over the vehicle to Vijay Sen, who paid Rs.90,000/- and assured that the remaining amount would be paid subsequently. Thereafter, Vijay Sen took possession of the vehicle and allegedly used it by affixing a false number plate with the registration No. of complainant’s vehicle. Thus, the accused persons committed the aforesaid offence.
3. Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, would submit that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the vehicle was being used with a forged number plate by co-accused Vijay Sen and therefore, the applicants herein do not have any role in commission of the crime in question. He would further submit that though applicant No. 1 Rohit Kumar Kankariya has two previous criminal antecedents but they were registered way back in the year 2019 and applicant No. 2 Anup Rawalani does not have any criminal antecedents. He would lastly submit that charge-sheet has yet not been filed and the applicants are in jail since 20/09/2026 and since conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, the applicants may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Vivek Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application and submit that the present applicants along with co-accused Vijay Sen have active roles in commission of the aforesaid offence. He would further submit that applicant No. 1 has two criminal antecedents registered in the year 2019 which is still pending for adjudication. Thus, he would pray for rejection of the bail application.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, role of the present applicants particularly considering that though applicant No. 1 has two previous criminal antecedents but it was registered way back in the year 2019 and applicant No. 2 has no previous criminal antecedents and looking to the fact that charge-sheet has not yet been filed, the applicants are in judicial custody since 20/09/2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, without commenting on the merits of the matter, this Court is inclined to enlarge the applicants on regular bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
7. It is directed that in the event of the applicants executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, they shall be released on bail, on
