1 2026:CGHC:19960 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3881 of 2026 Aryan Nayak S/o Shri Shankar Nayak Aged About 20 Years R/o Ramnagar, Ward No. 7, Udiya Mohalla, O.P. Chikhali, P.S. City Kotwali, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- Lalbagh, District- Rajnandgoan (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Sakshi Singh Thakur along with Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocates For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.04.2026 1. This is the third bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 552/2024 registered at Police Station Lalbagh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296 and 109 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The earlier two bail application of the present applicant were rejected on ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.30 18:42:41 +0530 2 merits vide orders dated 27.03.2025 and 08.05.2025, in MCRC No(s). 2471 of 2025 and 3590 of 2025. 3. As per prosecution story, the complainant, Sudhanshu Patre lodged a report before Police Station Lalbagh stating that he is a resident of Ward No. 7, Rajnandgaon. On 05.12.2024, he went to Sher-e-Punjab Dhaba along with his friends, and while he was standing there, the present applicant arrived at the spot and, due to some previous enmity, assaulted the victim, Gaurav Meshram, with a knife, as a result of which the victim sustained grievous injuries. Thereafter, an offence under Sections 296 and 109 of the B.N.S., 2023 was registered against the present applicant. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the instant third bail application has been preferred on the grounds of prolonged detention as well as a change in circumstances. The applicant has been in custody since 06.12.2024 and has undergone a substantial period of pre-trial detention. Further, since the material prosecution witnesses have already been examined, there is no likelihood of tampering with the evidence or influencing the witnesses. It is also submits that a total of 11 prosecution witnesses have already been examined before the learned trial Court, and none of them have supported the prosecution case, all have turned hostile. It is further submits that none of the prosecution witnesses examined so far have made any statement incriminating the present applicant, and thus, the very foundation of the prosecution case stands seriously weakened. It is submits that most importantly, PW-10, namely Gaurav Meshram, who is the injured witness, has also not supported the prosecution case and has turned hostile, which goes to the root of the matter and creates serious doubt regarding the involvement of the presnt 3 applicant. In view of the above developments during the trial and the prolonged detention of the applicant, further incarceration would amount to pre-trial punishment, which is impermissible in law, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, they pray for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 5. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application on the ground that the applicant assaulted the injured with a knife, causing grievous injuries, and the weapon has been seized from his possession, clearly indicating his involvement. It is further submitted that the hostility of prosecution witnesses suggests possible tampering with evidence by the applicant. Considering the serious nature of the offence and likelihood of influencing witnesses, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the serious nature of allegations against the applicant, particularly that he assaulted the injured with a knife causing grievous injuries and the weapon was seized from his possession, this Court is not inclined to grant bail. It is also significant that this is the third bail application filed by the applicant, and his earlier two bail applications have already been rejected on merits. Further, the possibility of the applicant having tampered with prosecution evidence cannot be ruled out, especially in light of witnesses turning hostile during trial. 8. Accordingly, the third bail application of the applicant - Aryan Nayak, involved in Crime No. 552/2024 registered at Police Station Lalbagh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296 and 109 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, is rejected. 4 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. 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 Abhishek