1 2025:CGHC:59485 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 10038 of 2025 1 - Vivek Kumar @ Raja Verma S/o Bhagwat Prasad Aged About 26 Years R/o Village- Jalso Ps Koni Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Anand Verma S/o Shri Shiv Prasad Verma Aged About 36 Years R/o Village- Jalso Ps Koni Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- SHO Koni, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 08.12.2025 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 358/2025 registered at Police Station Koni, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 191(2),193(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on the night of 09.08.2025 at about 11:30 p.m., the present applicants along with 2–3 associates, owing to previous enmity, assaulted the complainant/ RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 injured with a knife and a belt on his abdomen and chest, causing multiple injuries. Based on the injured’s report, the ofÏcials of Police Station Koni prepared a Dehati Nalishi and thereafter registered an FIR initially under Sections 109 and 3(5) of the BNS. The prime accused was first arrested, and on the basis of his memorandum statement, a total of nine persons including the present applicants and seven others (two of whom were minors) were implicated and arrested on 10.08.2025. The present applicants have been made accused solely on the basis of the memorandum of the prime accused, and have remained in custody since then. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated due to past enmity. It is submitted that the incident occurred late at night between 11:30 PM to 12:00 AM in a poorly lit area, and the complainant and injured were not in a position to identify the real culprits; the names of the applicants surfaced either in the statement of co-accused or in the FIR without any direct involvement, as per the medical and FIR records. The injuries sustained by the complainant were simple in nature, and though the doctor noted that lack of treatment could be dangerous, no fatal injury was caused. He further submits that the co-accused have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 9355/2025 vide order dated 19.11.2025, and the present applicants’ cases are similar, except that the name of applicant no. 2 appears in the FIR. While the applicants have previous criminal antecedents under the Excise Act, they have no 3 other pending cases, and both have been in jail since 10.08.2025. In view of the above, learned counsel submits that the applicants are entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has not been filed yet in the present case. She also submits that the present applicants have been rightly implicated, as the injured has specifically alleged that on the night of 09.08.2025, the applicants, along with others, assaulted him on the abdomen and chest with a knife and a belt, causing injuries of a serious nature. It is further submitted that the role of the applicants has surfaced during investigation through the memorandum statement of the prime accused, and the weapon used in the offence has also been recovered. She further submits that both applicants have one criminal antecedent each under the Excise Act, which reflects their criminal conduct. Considering the gravity of the allegation, the nature of assault, and their criminal antecedents, the applicants are not entitled to be released on 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 applicants since 10.08.2025, the fact that though the present applicants along with 2–3 associates, owing to previous enmity, assaulted the complainant/injured with a knife and a belt on his abdomen and chest, causing multiple injuries, but the injuries sustained by the complainant were simple in nature and other co-accused persons, 4 namely, Rajendra Verma @ Rajendra Bachch and Rajeev Verma have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 9355/2025 vide order dated 19.11.2025, and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused persons, further the applicants has only 1-1 criminal antecedent under the Excise Act, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant- Vivek Kumar @ Raja Verma and Anand Verma, involved in Crime No. 358/2025 registered at Police Station Koni, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 191(2),193(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan