Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10771 (CHH)

BHUPENDRA DHEEWAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCRC/3821/2026 · 2026-04-26

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:19413 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3821 of 2026 Bhupendra Dheewar S/o Banshilal Dheewar Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Bharari, Police Station Ratanpur, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Of Police Station Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aashutosh Shukla, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 27.04.2026 1. This is the first 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. 98/2026, registered at Police Station - Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2) 109, 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.04.27 17:48:57 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a complaint lodged by Smt Pushpa Dheewar complainant against the present applicant and one Minor that on Pushpendra Dheewar 10.02.2026 at night 11:20 P:M at Village Garvat Thana Ratanpur the Marriage procession "Barat" was moving from Amrai Para Chowk all "Baratis" were dancing in DJ sound and the dispute arose on account of Fire Crackers and when the son of complainant Trilok Dheewar tried to stop the Minor Pushpendra Dheewar he used to abused the Son of Complainant in filthy language and assaulted him by Knife & he was admitted to CIMS on 11.02.2026 & Discharged on 13.02.2026 and upon the Complaint the present applicant along with one other have been booked for the commission of the alleged offence under section 296, 351(3), 115(2), 109, 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 & 25,27 Arms Act 1959. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that as the applicant was neither involved in the alleged incident nor did he assault or abuse the victim; rather, being a relative, he only tried to pacify the situation, but has been arrested merely on suspicion without any cogent or reliable evidence. It is respectfully submitted that the applicant has not acted in the manner alleged by the prosecution and has no role in the commission of the alleged offences under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 109, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The applicant is a young person aged about 27 years and is the sole earning member of his family, and his continued incarceration since 12.02.2026 would cause undue hardship, particularly when the trial is likely to take 3 considerable time. It is further submitted that the FIR copy is not readily accessible due to it being marked as a sensitive case, and the injured son of the complainant was admitted to CIMS on 11.02.2026 and discharged on 13.02.2026 after medical examination. In these circumstances, and in the absence of any specific or substantiated allegations, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the allegations, and the fact that no specific injury has been attributed to the present applicant and that the injuries were allegedly caused by the co-accused, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the applicant has been in judicial custody since 12.02.2026, and further considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let applicant, Bhupendra Dheewar, involved in Crime No. 98/2026, registered at Police Station - Ratanpur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2) 109, 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following 4 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 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. 8. Office 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 vaibhav