1 2025:CGHC:36500 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5856 of 2025 Vivek Harpal S/o Shriram Harpal Aged About 22 Years R/o Odiya Mohalla, New Balaji Nagar, Khursipar, Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Officer-In-Charge Police Station- Khursipar, Dist. Durg, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anadi Sharma, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.07.2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 42/2025 registered at Police Station Khursipar, District Durg(C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution, the incident in question occurred on VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2025.07.29 10:19:03 +0530 2 14.03.2025 in Oriya Basti, Balaji Nagar, Khursipar, District Durg. On the said date, a local celebration involving music and dance was taking place in front of the residence of applicant Vivek Harpal. Several people from the locality, including one Prince and Naresh Kumar alias Navraj, were participating in the festivities. According to the complainant, a scuffle broke out during the dancing, allegedly due to a push, whereupon Prince is said to have stabbed Lucky below the right hip and also inflicted injuries on Kumari Harpal near the left wrist and on the applicant Vivek Harpal near the neck. Thereafter, it is alleged that the applicant Vivek Harpal, along with Lucky and Sahadev alias Babuni, caught hold of Prince and took him to Vivek's house. At around 01:40 PM, the complainant, along with her husband Chandramani and son Navraj, claims to have reached the spot and allegedly saw Prince being assaulted by Vivek, Lucky, and Sahadev with fists and a knife. It is further alleged that Prince sustained injuries on his stomach, head, and hand, and was later taken to B.M. Shah Hospital, Bhilai, for treatment. The FIR also mentions that certain individuals such as Lalit Kumar, Durga, and Sarita are said to be eyewitnesses to the alleged incident. Based on the complaint, the police registered the case and took up investigation. The charge sheet has since been filed, and the applicant is currently in judicial custody. 3. The applicant, a 22-year-old with no criminal history, has been falsely implicated in a case arising from a sudden altercation during Holi celebrations, which led to cross FIRs. The original FIR (No. 41/2025) names Prince as the aggressor, who allegedly stabbed the applicant and others after a minor provocation. The applicant, who sustained stab injuries while trying to protect his maternal aunt, acted in self- 3 defence and had no intent to kill. The allegations in the counter-FIR (No. 42/2025) against the applicant are vague and lack specific attribution of fatal injuries. Moreover, co-accused minors Prince and Lucky Bagh have already been granted bail, establishing parity. Although a knife is shown to be recovered from both the applicant and Prince, FIR records clearly indicate the recovery was from Prince, casting doubt on the prosecution's case under the Arms Act. The charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant has been in custody since 23.05.2025, and there is no risk of absconding or tampering. He is ready to comply with all conditions imposed by the Hon’ble Court. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 15.03.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that the present applicant assaulted the injured with knife, resulting in grievous injuries. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence, and also taking into account the fact that a counter-report has been lodged by both parties, and that at the time of the incident, individuals on both sides sustained injuries including a juvenile on the prosecution side, who is also an accused in the report 4 lodged by the applicant’s side and has been granted bail as well as one juvenile from the applicant’s side who has also been granted bail and it is evident that the incident occurred on the eve of the Holi festival due to a trivial issue, in the present case, the charge sheet has already been filed, and the applicant has been in jail since 15.03.2025 and the conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail. 7. Let the Applicant – Vivek Harpal, involved in Crime No. 42/2025 registered at Police Station Khursipar, District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 5 during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office 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 vaibhav