1 2025:CGHC:52699 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8546 of 2025 Jagesh @ Jaggu Yadav S/o Late Shri Kuber Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Near Sitla Mandir Nayapara Ward Dhamtari, Tehsil And District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Office-In-Charge Of Police Station City Kotwali, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Soumya Rai, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29/10/2025 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 45/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 109(1), 296, 351(3), 3(5), 190, 191(2)(3) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 01.03.2025, the 2 applicants/accused had an altercation with Rajkumar Yadav along with Rajveer Singh Mehra alias Ginni, Jaggu alias Jagesh Yadav, Jaggu's uncle Rajesh Yadav, Nirbhay alias Alo's brother Bablu Dhimar, and Shubham Yadav. Taking this matter further, on 02.03.2025, the applicants/accused, along with other co-accused individuals and juvenile delinquents, formed an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons, with the intention of causing a riot. They forcibly pulled Rajkumar off his motorcycle in Naya Para Ward, Dhamtari, abused him, and threatened to kill him. The accused Ginni Sardar, Jaggu, Nirbhay alias Alo's brother, and others assaulted Rajkumar multiple times with sharp objects and sticks, causing life-threatening injuries. Based on the complaint filed by Lalit Mishra, a case (Crime No. 45/2025) was registered against the applicants/accused and other accused individuals under Sections 126(2), 109(1), 296, 351(3), 3(5), 190, and 191(2), (3) of the BNS. After completing the investigation, a charge sheet was filed and subsequently, applicants are arrested. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.06.2025 in MCRC No.4459 of 2025 on the ground that the applicant along with co-accused persons including 2 juvenile formed an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons i.e. knife and sticks with the intention of causing a riot forcibly pulsed the injured off his motorcycle and assaulted him, due to which, the 3 injured sustained 15 injuries, out of which, 8 are stab injuries, which are grievous in nature, therefore, this second bail application has been filed on the ground that the main accused, namely Rajveer Singh, who assaulted the injured with a knife, has already been granted bail by the trial Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 and the co-accused, namely Rajesh Yadav @ Khubu, whose first bail application was rejected, preferred a second bail application on the ground that he had assaulted the injured with a stick, whereas the injuries caused to the injured were by sharp- edged weapon and he has been granted bail vide order dated 17.10.2025 in MCRC No.8401 of 2025 and the case of present applicant is identical to that of co-accused, Rajesh Yadav. further charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case and the applicant is in jail since 04.03.2025, hence, she prays for releasing the applicant on regular bail. 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. He further submits that the applicant along with co-accused persons including 2 juvenile formed an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons i.e. knife and sticks with the intention of causing a riot forcibly pulsed the injured off his motorcycle and assaulted him, due to which, the injured sustained 15 injuries, out of which, 8 are stab injuries, which are grievous in nature, therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.06.2025 in MCRC No. 4459 of 2025 on the ground that the applicant along with co-accused persons including 2 juvenile formed an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons i.e. knife and sticks with the intention of causing a riot forcibly pulsed the injured off his motorcycle and assaulted him, due to which, the injured sustained 15 injuries, out of which, 8 are stab injuries, which are grievous in nature, thereafter, the applicant has preferred present second bail application on the ground that the main accused, namely Rajveer Singh, who assaulted the injured with a knife, has already been granted bail by the trial Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 and the co-accused, namely Rajesh Yadav @ Khubu, whose first bail application was rejected, preferred a second bail application on the ground that he had assaulted the injured with a stick, whereas the injuries caused to the injured were by sharp-edged weapon and he has been granted bail vide order dated 17.10.2025 in MCRC No.8401 of 2025 on the said ground, but considering the fact that as the identically situated co-accused, Rajesh Yadav has already been granted bail by this Court, as such, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 5 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Jagesh @ Jaggu Yadav, involved in Crime No. 45/2025 registered at Police Station City Kotwali, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 109(1), 296, 351(3), 3(5), 190, 191(2)(3) of BNS, 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 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 6 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