1 2026:CGHC:17877 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2118 of 2026 1 - Rishabh Tiwari S/o Hemant Kumar Aged About 20 Years R/o Near Balaji, Hospital, Street Number- 02, Saket Nagar, Kohaka, Bhilai, Tehsil And District- Durg (C.G.) (Details Of Applicant Properly Not Mentioned In The Impugned Order Sheet) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Supela, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Monika Singh Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 20.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 35/2026, registered at Police Station : Supela, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, it is alleged that on 08.01.2026 at about 8:00 PM, the complainant, Hrithik Prasad ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA Date: 2026.04.22 11:29:30 +0530 2 Gupta, had gone to study at the PG accommodation of his college classmate Sunny Kumar along with his friend Rishabh Raj, and while they were returning to their hostel on 09.01.2026 at around 12:00 midnight, near Road No.02, Saket Nagar, Kohka, close to Balaji Hostel, the accused persons, namely Arnav @ Sonu Yadav, Aman Saw, Vasu Kumar and the present Applicant, on noticing Rishabh Raj, allegedly began abusing him in filthy language referring to his mother and sister, extended threats to kill him, and thereafter assaulted him with hands and fists owing to a prior dispute; it is further alleged that co-accused Arnav @ Sonu Yadav assaulted the complainant Hrithik Gupta with a stick, causing injuries to his head and other parts of the body, while Rishabh Raj was allegedly assaulted by co-accused Aman Saw @ Sethia with a hand bracelet, resulting in injuries to him as well; on the basis of the said incident, an FIR came to be registered. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, and that he has no role in the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the FIR as well as the Statement of the injured persons, namely, Hrithik Prasad Gupta and Rishabh Raj goes to show that the applicant was present on the place of offence whereas Aman Saw and Arnav @ Sonu has caused injury to two injured persons. It is contended that the Applicant is the sole earner of his family and is responsible for their livelihood, and his continued 3 incarceration is causing severe hardship to his dependents. It is further submitted that the dispute was between other persons and the applicant was merely attempting to pacify the situation. It is argued that the injuries sustained by the complainant are simple in nature and do not warrant prolonged detention of the applicant. It is also pointed out that the charge-sheet has already been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. The applicant has been in custody since 14.01.2026. It is further submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of the stated address, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with prosecution witnesses, and he is ready and willing to furnish adequate surety and abide by all such conditions as may be imposed by this Court. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents. Therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the applicant has been rightly implicated. It is further contended that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and he was an active participant in the said offence. It is also argued that the possibility of the applicant influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence cannot be ruled out, particularly as the witnesses are known to him. Accordingly, it is prayed that the application for bail be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case 4 diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it transpires that as per the FIR and the statements of the injured witnesses, the specific allegations of inflicting injuries are attributed to the co-accused persons, namely Arnav @ Sonu Kumar and Aman Saw, whereas the role assigned to the present applicant appears to be limited in nature. The injuries sustained by the complainant and the other injured person are stated to be simple. The applicant has been in jail since 14.01.2026, has no previous criminal antecedents, and the charge-sheet has already been filed; thus, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Rishabh Tiwari, involved in Crime No.35/2026, registered at Police Station : Supela, District- Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 115(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 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 5 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 misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS is issued and the applicant fail 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 6 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/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Saxena