1 2026:CGHC:9493 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1885 of 2026 Vinay Dhruv S/o Late Bharatlal Dhruv Aged About 19 Years R/o Ward No.19, Purani Basti Tilda Nevra Ps- Tilda Nevra Dist- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S. Tilda Nevra, District – Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second 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. 390/2024, registered at Police Station – Tilda Nevra, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) and 109 of BNS and Section 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. Earlier the First bail application of the applicant was rejected vide order dated 28.07.2025 passed in MCRC No. 5858/2025, on merits. 3. The case of the prosecution, is that As per the prosecution story, the applicant/accused Vinay Dhruv, along with other co-accused, is implicated in Crime in question, and it is alleged that the applicant, RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 along with others, attacked the injured person, Ramakrishna Sen, father of the complainant, causing him grievous injuries with a sharp knife. The applicant is alleged to have inflicted several injuries, including on both arms and below them leading to a charge sheet. Hence, this application. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and the charge- sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that so far as the status of trial is concerned, out of 17 prosecution witnesses only 4 have been examined and their statements are recorded, and the injured witness has also not supported the case of prosecution. The applicant is in jail since 16.08.2024 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant along with co-accused persons is said to have assaulted the injured Ramkrishna Sen, who received grievous stab injuries on his person, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that so far as the status of trial is concerned, out of 17 prosecution witnesses only 4 have been examined and their statements are recorded, and the injured witness has also not supported the case of 3 prosecution, the applicant is in jail since 16.08.2024 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Let applicant, Vinay Dhruv, involved in Crime No. 390/2024, registered at Police Station – Tilda Nevra, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) and 109 of BNS and Section 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 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 4 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. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of 04 months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. Office 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 Rajshekhar