1 2025:CGHC:16473 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2752 of 2025 1 - Lakhan Bairagi S/o Dulichand Bairagi Aged About 35 Years R/o Block No. 03, House No. 24, B.S.U.P. Colony Bairagi Dera, Saddu, P.S. Vidhansabha, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Deep Bairagi (Wrongly Mentioned As Beragi In Annexure A-1) S/o Late Kaliya Bairagi Aged About 19 Years R/o Block No. 1, House No. 25, B.S.U.P. Colony Bairagi Dera, Saddu, P.S. Vidhansabha, Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Satation House OfÏcer, Police Station Vidhansabha, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicants : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 38/2024, registered at Police Station : Vidhansabha, KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 506, 323, 324, 34 of IPC and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 3. The case of the prosecution, in brief is that the complainant has lodged a report before the concerned police station with intend that on the date of incident, there was dispute arose between the accused persons and injured person due to previous enmity and thereafter, the accused persons have assaulted upon him by knife, by causing injuries received upon ears, face and stomach. Based upon the such report, the concerned police station has registered offence publishable under Sections 307, 294, 506, 34 323, 324, 330 of I.P.C. and section 25, 27 of Arms Act against the accused persons and applicants. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that at the time of incident, there was simple dispute arose between parties for purpose of previous enmity, but the applicants have neither assaulted upon injured person, nor committed any aforesaid offence as alleged by the prosecution against them. The injured person have received injury which is committed by the other accused person not by the present applicants only on the basis of merely suspicious, the applicants have falsely been implicated in connection of this crime without any sufÏcient reason. He further submits that the two prosecution witnesses have examined in the learned trial Court by prosecution agency and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. 3 The other accused person has granted regular /anticipatory bail by this Court and also one other accused has granted bail by the learned trial Court and on the basis of parity, this Court may kindly be pleased to consider it and grant bail to the applicants and the applicants are in jail since 16.01.2024 and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and it is further stated that the present applicants are the main accused who had assaulted the injured by knife on account of which the injuries sustained by the injured are grievous in nature. Hence, the present applicants are not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicants and the fact that the present applicants are the main accused who had assaulted the injured by knife due to previous enmity on account of which, the injured person received injuries on his ears, face and stomach and the injuries sustained by the injured are grievous in nature further the co-accused persons who have been granted bail by this Court only on the ground that they were not assaulted the injured, they were only accompanying the main accused persons who had assaulted the injured thus, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicants on bail. 4 8. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants namely- Lakhan Bairagi and Deep Bairagi, involved in Crime No. 38/2024, registered at Police Station : Vidhansabha, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 294, 506, 323, 324, 34 of IPC and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act, is rejected. 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. OfÏce 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 Kunal