1 2025:CGHC:17489 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2916 of 2025 Ghanshyam @ Sonu Nayak S/o Kalicharan Nayak Aged About 30 Years R/o Vatika Nagar, Kota, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station - Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16.04.2025 1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken through video conferencing. 2. This is the First bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 226/2024 registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence MANPREET KAUR Digitally signed by MANPREET KAUR Date: 2025.04.21 16:50:18 +0530 2 punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 118(1), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25, 27 of the Arms Act. 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant has made report to the concerned police station Saraswati Nagar, Raipur that on the date of incident, there was a simple dispute in between the accused persons and injured person and thereafter, the accused persons have assaulted injured person and as result of the same, the injured person received injuries. Based upon such report, the police has registered the offence punishable under section (1) 296, 351 (2), 115 (2), 1182, 3(5) of B.N.S. and section 25, 27 of Arms Act at Crime No. 226/2024 against the present applicant and other accused person. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the alleged crime, he has not committed any offence as alleged against him. Further, the complainant has made false complaint against the applicant without any sufficient reason and only on the basis of mere suspicion, the applicant has been implicated in this case. The prosecution has cooked up concocted story to falsely implicated the present applicant upon the false and baseless allegations. Lastly, the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.09.2024, though the charge-sheet has been filed, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. Learned State Counsel submits that the applicant assaulted two 3 injured persons using sharp knife due to which, they are stated to have sustained grievous injuries which are serious in nature and there was possibility of death. Further, knife was stuck on the back of one injured when he was brought for treatment which itself shows that a fatal blow with the knife was caused by the applicant, accordingly, Section 326 of the IPC was added. Lastly, the applicant has 05 previous criminal antecedents registered against him. Hence, his bail application is liable to be rejected. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that the applicant assaulted two injured persons using sharp knife due to which, they are stated to have sustained grievous injuries which are serious in nature and there was possibility of death. Further, knife was stuck on the back of one injured when he was brought for treatment which itself shows that a fatal blow with the knife was caused by the applicant, accordingly, Section 326 of the IPC was added and applicant has 05 previous criminal antecedents registered against him, hence having regard to the nature of the offence, the facts and circumstances of the case and after considering the arguments put forth by both the parties, it does not appear appropriate to grant the benefit of bail to the applicant/accused as such, the bail application of the applicant is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant- Ghanshyam @ Sonu Nayak filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 226/2024 registered at Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable 4 under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 118(1), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25, 27 of the Arms Act, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned, is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. OfÏce is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Manpreet