Chhattisgarh HC rejects bail of Sukma man accused of Maoist links, arms recovery

RAIPUR: The Chhattisgarh High Court has rejected the bail application of a 28-year-old man from the Maoist-affected Chintalnar tehsil of Sukma district, arrested in September 2024 for alleged Maoist links and the recovery of arms and Naxalite literature.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal stated that the trial court concerned is free to expedite the trial of the accused.
The appeal challenged the order dated February 14, 2025, by the Special Session Judge, NIA Act, Bastar at Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh, which had rejected the appellant’s bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyay Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, concerns the High Court or Court of Session’s special powers regarding bail, including the ability to release accused individuals on bail, impose or modify conditions, and provisions for notifying the Public Prosecutor in serious offense cases.
The appellant, Mantosh Mandal, was arrested for offenses under Sections 4, Cra 487 of 2025, and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, as well as Sections 23, 39(2), and 40 of the UP(P) Act.
In his appeal, the appellant prayed for the court to set aside the trial court. According to the case details, on September 25, 2024, police, acting on a tip-off, raided the Mandal’s house and apprehended him. During interrogation, he allegedly confessed to involvement in Maoists activities since 2020.
Police seized explosive substances, including Potassium Nitrate, Aluminum powder, a tiffin bomb, detonators, Naxalite literature, a laptop, and a mobile phone, from his possession, and subsequently arrested him.
The appellant’s counsel argued that the arrest was based on mere suspicion, asserting that the appellant is a simple villager with no connection to any anti-social or Maoists activity. The counsel claimed the seized articles were not exclusively in the appellant's possession and were attributed to him to strengthen the case.
Given the appellant's arrest on 25 September 2024, and the anticipated lengthy duration for the appeal's final adjudication, the counsel requested bail for the appellant.
Conversely, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) counsel opposed the bail plea, stating that the recovery of explosive substances, including a tiffin bomb and Naxalite literature, directly links the appellant to the alleged offense.
The NIA counsel argued that the appellant’s activities affect the public and cause harm to the nation, and considering the prima facie evidence, he is not entitled to bail.
After hearing both parties and reviewing the case material, the High Court, considering the allegations and the seized items, including explosive substances, a tiffin bomb, Naxalite literature, a laptop, and a mobile phone, rejected the bail application of Mantosh Mandal.
The court directed the trial court to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously and ordered its office to send a certified copy of the order to the trial court.