1 2025:CGHC:46386 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7224 of 2025 Shiv Khande S/o Paras Khande Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Gatoura, Ambedkar Chowk, P.S. Masturi, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station- Masturi, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Mirza Kaisher Beg, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.09.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 318/2025 registered at Police Station - Masturi, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 109, and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant, Santoshkant, lodged a report at P.S. Masturi against the present applicant and co-accused Sumendra Khande. The complainant resides with his family near Ambedkar Chowk, Village Gatoura, where he runs a RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 grocery shop. On 22.05.2025, at around noon, while the complainant was at his shop along with his son Shashikant, co- accused Sumendra Khande, who was in a drunken state, came to the shop, purchased a water pouch and Rajshree, but refused to pay. When the complainant asked him to pay, he started abusing and threatening to kill him. Sumendra then left on his motorcycle, returned shortly after with Rs. 100/-, handed the money to the complainant’s son, and went away. Later in the evening, Sumendra came back along with the present applicant, his elder brother, and both of them started threatening to kill Shashikant. Hearing the commotion, the complainant’s wife and his brother Santram also came to the spot. At that moment, the applicant attacked Shashikant on the head with an iron pipe, causing a serious head injury, due to which Shashikant fell to the ground bleeding profusely. During the course of investigation, the present applicant and co-accused were arrested. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, he has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has neither committed nor participated in any such act, which may amount to any of the offence mentioned above. He further submits that though the injuries sustained by the injured are said to be grievous in nature but the same does not corroborate from the medical report of the injured. He also submits that the applicant has two criminal antecedents of the years 2021 and 2024 and he is in jail since 25.05.2025 and the trial is likely to take some time for its 3 conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the allegations against the present applicant are serious and grave in nature, involving a brutal assault on the victims with an iron pipe, resulting in severe head injuries. It is submitted that the incident was premeditated, as the co-accused initially created a dispute at the complainant’s shop and later returned with the present applicant to jointly threaten and attack the complainant’s family members. During the incident, two persons sustained grievous injuries, both of whom had to undergo surgical treatment, and it is specifically stated that Santoshkant also suffered a fracture, which is clearly reflected in the medical records. The applicant’s active participation is well-established from the consistent statements of eyewitnesses, including the complainant, his wife, and his brother Santram, who categorically witnessed the assault. He also submits that the present applicant has 02 more criminal antecedents in the similar nature which is pending, shows that the he is a habitual offender. Therefore, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident that the present incident is serious and of a grave nature, involving a brutal assault wherein two persons sustained grievous injuries. The material on record reveals that the incident was premeditated, as the co-accused initially created a dispute at the complainant’s 4 shop and later returned along with the present applicant, where both of them jointly threatened and attacked the complainant’s family members. During the assault, two victims suffered severe injuries, both requiring surgical intervention, and it is specifically noted that Santoshkant sustained a fracture, as reflected in the medical reports. The statements of eyewitnesses, including the complainant, his wife, and his brother Santram, are consistent and clearly establish the active participation of the applicant in the commission of the offence. The nature of the injuries, the weapon used, and the manner in which the assault was carried out indicate a high degree of criminal intent and brutality. Further the fact that the present applicant has 02 more criminal antecedents in the similar nature, which shows that he is a habitual offender, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail, accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Shiv Khande, involved in Crime No. 318/2025 registered at Police Station - Masturi, District- Bilaspur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 109, and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 7. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul dewangan