1 2026:CGHC:19951 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3907 of 2026 Indra Kumar Nishad @ Indu S/o Ashwani Nishad Aged About 19 Years R/o Ganeshpur, Chowki Birejhar, P.S. Kurud, District – Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Chowki Birejhar, Police Station Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.238/2025registered at Police Station – Chowki Birejhar, Police Station - Kurud (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 109(1) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 06.10.2025, an FIR was lodged against Neeraj Kumar Dhruw and the present applicant by the complainant, Tekram Narang. The allegation is that on 03.10.2025, during the Dussehra festival, a Ramleela performance was being held at Dussehra Ground in Village Ganeshpur. At about 1:50 AM, the son of the complainant became involved in a heated altercation with the accused PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.04.30 18:25:51 +0530 2 persons. It is alleged that, as a result of the said altercation, the applicant, along with co-accused persons, started abusing the injured/victim, Rajveer Narang, and assaulted him with hands, fists, and a sharp-edged weapon, thereby causing injuries. 3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She further submits that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC Nos. 10094/2025 and 103/2026 vide orders dated 09.12.2025 and 08.01.2026, respectively. She also submits that, till date, no prosecution witness has been examined by the learned Trial Court. She further submits that neither the victim nor his father has appeared before the Trial Court despite summons having been issued to them on six occasions. It is also submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the applicant has been in custody since 13.01.2026. As the trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude, it is prayed that the applicant be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. She further submits that the present applicant assaulted the injured with a knife, causing grievous injuries that are dangerous to life. She also submits that the name of the applicant has been mentioned in the FIR. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the 3 fact that the main allegation against the applicant is that he allegedly assaulted the injured with a knife, causing grievous injuries and dangerous to life, and that the applicant’s name is mentioned in the FIR, further, considering that the fact that the co-accused persons who have been granted bail by this Court had a limited role confined to assault by hand and fist, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant - Indra Kumar Nishad @ Indu involved in Crime No.238/2025registered at Police Station – Chowki Birejhar, Police Station - Kurud (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 109(1) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected at this stage. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. As per the submission of learned counsel for the applicant, neither the victim nor his father has appeared before the Trial Court despite summons having been issued to them on six occasions. In view of the same, the Superintendent of Police concerned is directed to ensure the presence of the victim and his father before the Trial Court on the next date so fixed by the Trial Court. 10. The Registrar (Judicial) and learned State counsel are directed to communicate this order to the concerned Superintendent of Police and Trial Court concerned, respectively, for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti