1 2026:CGHC:9530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 388 of 2026 Yogesh Sahu @ Yogu S/o Pannalal Sahu, Aged About 19 Years R/o Village Bhendsar, P.S. Bhakara District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Police Station Bhakara District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. 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 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. 136/2025, registered at Police Station Bhakara, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 123 and 109 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the applicant called the victim to his backyard and handed her a love letter, which she refused. Thereafter, the applicant allegedly consumed poison and asked the victim to consume it as well. The victim initially refused, however, the applicant allegedly ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.02.25 11:16:22 +0530 2 threatened her that she would be falsely implicated if anything happened to him. Under such duress, the victim allegedly consumed the poison given by the applicant and fell ill. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an innocent person who has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the applicant and the victim were in a love affair, which was not acceptable to the victim’s family. If the applicant had consumed poison (fungicide), he would also have fallen ill, however, there is no evidence on record to show that the applicant fell ill. This fact does not corroborate the prosecution’s version, wherein the victim has stated that the applicant first consumed poison and thereafter gave it to the victim. He also submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 29.11.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 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. 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 and gravity of the offence, and the allegations that the applicant administered a poisonous substance to the victim, aged about 15 years and four months, as a result of which she was hospitalized and remained under treatment for four days and further considering that, as per the order- sheet dated 13.01.2026, the bail application was earlier adjourned in view of the period of detention and the nature of the offence and that the charge sheet has already been filed, the applicant has been in custody 3 since 29.11.2025, and the trial is likely to take time to conclude, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let the applicant – Yogesh Sahu @ Yogu, involved in Crime No. 136/2025, registered at Police Station Bhakara, District Dhamtari (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 123 and 109 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 his, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before 4 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 sufÏcient 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. 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