1 2025:CGHC:54178 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8346 of 2025 Gajendra Yadav @ Goldy S/o Shri Santosh Yadav Aged About 28 Years R/o Yadav Mohalla, Tikrapara, P.S.- Tikrapara, District - Raipur (C.G.) (Details Mentioned As Per Order Sheet) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House OfÏcer (S.H.O.) P.S.- Kotwali, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate For Non-applicant/State(s) : Mr. Swajeet Ubeja, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 06.11.2025 1. This is the first 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. 77/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 333, 338, 238, 111(2)(B), 3(5) of B.N.S. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, Sheetal Niwari, lodged an FIR that on 08.05.2025, she and her two sons were at home. Between about 2:00 PM to 3:00 PM, they were sitting KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 in the verandah of the house. The main door was closed but not latched. At that time, Bhuvan, Pankaj, Goldy/applicant, and others forcibly entered the house by kicking the door open. They caught hold of her son, Pratyush, saying, “Today they will kill him and finish him,” and Pankaj, Goldy, and their associates held Pratyush while Bhuvan repeatedly stabbed him on his stomach and chest with a sharp knife with the intention to kill him. When they (the family members) tried to rescue him, the accused fled. Due to the stabbing, the complainant’s son collapsed, covered in blood. He was immediately taken to Ambedkar Hospital for treatment. He sustained deep injuries at 3-4 places on his stomach and chest. At the time of the incident, the tenants living in her house were present and witnessed the incident. Based on the complainant’s report, Crime No. 77/2025 under Sections 109(2), 333, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita was registered at Police Station Kotwali, and investigation commenced. During investigation, the statements of the complainant and witnesses were recorded. The accused were traced, taken into custody, and a memorandum of accused Bhuvan Harpal was recorded under Section 23(2) of the Evidence Act, wherein he admitted that all three, with common intention, had stabbed Pratyush Tiwari on his stomach and chest with the intention to kill him, and had washed off the blood from the knife with water. The knife used in the incident was produced and seized. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant had tried to save the injured, but it is 3 alleged that he has been assigned the role of catching hold of the injured, whereas the co-accused Bhuvan Harpal is said to have caused the injuries with a knife to the injured. He further submits that no seizure has been effected from the present applicant, whereas the knife has been seized from the co-accused Bhuvan Harpal. The applicant has been in jail since 18.06.2025, and in the present case, charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. As the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the allegations against the applicant are grave and serious. As per the FIR, the applicant, along with the co-accused, forcibly entered the complainant’s house and intentionally participated in the assault on the injured Pratyush. The applicant, along with others, restrained the victim while co-accused Bhuvan inflicted multiple stab wounds on his stomach and chest with the intention to kill. The assault was premeditated and carried a clear threat to take the victim’s life. It is further submitted that the injured sustained deep stab injuries at several places on vital parts of the body, clearly attracting the offence of attempt to murder. The knife used in the offence has been seized at the instance of co-accused Bhuvan during investigation, and the memorandum statement supports the prosecution version that the applicant acted with common intention. Considering the seriousness of the offence, the 4 manner in which the crime was committed, the application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the specific allegation of inflicting knife blows is attributed solely to co-accused Bhuvan Harpal, from whom the knife has been seized. As regards the present applicant, the allegation is limited to the extent that he allegedly caught hold of the injured. No weapon or any incriminating article has been recovered from him and in the present case, charge-sheet has already been filed, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he has remained in custody since 18.06.2025 and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, hence, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Let the applicant, Gajendra Yadav @ Goldy, involved in Crime No. 77/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 333, 338, 238, 111(2)(B), 3(5) of B.N.S, 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 5 his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them 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 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of 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 sufÏcient 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. OfÏce 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 Kunal