1 2025:CGHC:57300 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9545 of 2025 • Ajay Rathore Son Of Shivnath Prasad Rathore Aged About 31 Years Resident Of Podibhatha, Akaltara, Police Station Akaltara, District Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 25.11.2025 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.203/2025, registered at Police Station – Masturi, District – Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 351(2), 3(5), 118(2) of BNS, 2023. 2. The first bail application filed by the applicant was rejected on 21.08.2025 in MCRC No.4698 of 2025. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2025.11.26 18:47:05 +0530 2 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant has made complaint to the concerned police station alleging inter-alia that on the date of incident i.e. 03.04.2025 as per direction of Pitambar Lodhi, accused persons went to house of the complainant for taking amount of Pitambar Lodhi, and thereafter there was some dispute arose between the complainant and accused person in the name of subject amount, and when the complainant has refused to give subject amount, then accused persons have committed marpeet with the complainant by hand, fist and blade by using filthy language, and as result of the same, the complainant has received injuries on his cheek. Based upon such complaint concerned police has been registered against the applicant for the offence u/s 115(2), 296, 351(2), 3(5), 118(2) of B.N.S. 2023. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is said to have caused injuries by blade on the face of the injured and the injury has been stated to be simple in nature as per the MLC report. He also submits that one co-accused is absconding because of that charges have not been framed against the present applicant. He would submit that the applicant is in jail since 09/05/2025 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and he would submit that though the injury has been stated to be simple in nature as per the MLC but when he was taken for further medical treatment the injury was found to be muscle deep and as per the statement of the injured recorded under Section 180 of BNS, which goes to show that 24 stitches were made on his wound, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 3 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the applicant and considering the fact that the applicant is said to have caused injuries by blade on the face of the injured though the injury has been stated to be simple in nature as per the MLC report, but when he was taken for further medical treatment, the injury was found to be muscle deep and 24 stitches were made on the wound and his first bail application was also rejected on that ground and there appears to be no new ground, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant Ajay Rathore involved in Crime No.203/2025 registered at Police Station Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 351(2), 3(5), 118(2) of B.N.S. 2023, is rejected. 9. Considering the fact that one co-accused is absconding because of that charges have not been framed against the present applicant, therefore, trial Court is directed to separate the trial of the applicant and proceed further in accordance with law within a period of six months. 10. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaishali