1 2025:CGHC:47518 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7412 of 2025 Vivek Kashyap @ Gabdu S/o Sushil Kashyap Aged About 21 Years R/o Lalbag Amaguda, Near Durga Mandir Jagdalpur, Police Station Kotwali, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Kotwali Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 16/09/2025 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 154/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jagdalpur, District : Bastar (Jagdalpur) (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 109, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by AKHILESH KUMAR DEWANGAN 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 12.05.2025 at about 9:30 P.M., complainant Himanshu Nag, alongwith his friends Dheeraj Thakur and Kamlesh Nayak, was standing near Krishna Saloon at Samund Chowk when accused Amit Sharma, Vivek Kashyap alias Gabdu, and their associates arrived and, due to an old enmity, abused them in obscene language and issued threats to kill them. It is alleged that Amit Sharma and Vivek Kashyap assaulted Sumit Pandey and Dheeraj Thakur with sharp knives, causing injuries to Sumit’s chest and Dheeraj’s waist, while other associates beat them with fists and slaps. The injured were taken to Maharani Hospital for treatment, and on this report offences were registered against the applicant and co-accused under Sections 296, 351(2), 109, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that the Medico-Legal Report shows only simple injuries on the applicant, no offence is made out against him, he has not acted as alleged by the prosecution, no weapon or sharp-edged object has been recovered from him and the alleged weapon was seized from a co-accused, moreover, similarly placed co-accused have already been granted bail by the trial Court on 18.08.2025 and 30.08.2025 in B.P. Nos. 283/2025 and 302/2025, copies of which are annexed as Annexure A-3 (Coll.). The applicant is in jail since 16.05.2025, the applicant has two criminal antecedents, out of which, in one case, the applicant has already 3 been acquitted, beside that case only one case, which is of the year 2022 under the IPC is pending against the applicant, further charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that the allegation against present applicant is that, on 12.05.2025 at about 9:30 P.M., he, along with co-accused Amit Sharma, assaulted Sumit Pandey and Dheeraj Thakur with a sharp knife, inflicting grievous injuries on Sumit’s chest and Dheeraj’s waist, after abusing and threatening them due to an old enmity, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has two criminal antecedents of the year 2022 under the IPC, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 16.05.2025, the fact that though the allegation against present applicant is that, due to an old enmity on 12.05.2025 at about 9:30 P.M., he, along with co-accused Amit Sharma, assaulted Sumit Pandey and Dheeraj Thakur with a sharp knife, inflicting injuries on Sumit’s chest and Dheeraj’s waist, after abusing and threatening them, but as per C.T. Scan Report, there appears to be no 4 abnormality detected, so far as criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, applicant has two criminal antecedents, out of which, in one case, the applicant has already been acquitted and one case, which is of the year 2022 under the IPC is pending against him, further charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Vivek Kashyap @ Gabdu, involved in Crime No. 154/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali Jagdalpur, District : Bastar (Jagdalpur) (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 109, 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two 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 him 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil