1 2026:CGHC:2229 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 476 of 2026 Rahul Chauhan S/o Khuman Singh Chauhan Aged About 18 Years R/o Baigapara, Atal Awas Lakholi, P.S.- Kotwali, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- P.S.- Kotwali, Distt.- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Priyanka Rai, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14.01.2026 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. 450/2025 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) offence under Sections 296, 309(4), 109(1), 126(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, the victim/complainant, namely Pramod Turkane, lodged a report with the police on 24.08.2025, alleging that the main accused, Vishal Bansfod, along with two other persons, abused him. When he tried to stop them, the main accused, Vishal Bansfod, struck him with a sharp-edged object, while the other two persons beat ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.16 12:14:00 +0530 2 him with their hands and fists. It is further alleged that one mobile phone and Rs. 400/- were taken away by the accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits the present applicant has not been named in the FIR, nor is there any allegation that he struck the complainant with a sharp-edged object or weapon. The complainant has clearly stated that the main accused, Vishal Bansfod, hit him with a sharp-edged weapon. He submits that the applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of the main accused, Vishal Bansfod. The police have not seized any weapon or other incriminating material from the present applicant, and only Rs. 200/- has been seized from him. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 25.08.2025, 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 submitted before the competent Court in this case. He submits that the co-accused, namely Vishal Bansfod, assaulted the injured with a sharp edged object, causing grievous injuries. So far as the present applicant is concerned, the allegation against him is that he allegedly assaulted the injured with hands and fists. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in this case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and from perusal of the case diary, it transpires that the main allegation is 3 against the co-accused, namely Vishal Bansfod, who assaulted the injured with a sharp edged object, resulting in grievous injuries. So far as the present applicant is concerned, his case is distinguishable from that of the co-accused Vishal Bansfod, as the only allegation against him is that he assaulted the injured with hands and fists, causing simple injuries. Furthermore, the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court and he is in jail since 25.08.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Rahul Chauhan, involved in Crime No. 450/2025 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) offence under Sections 296, 309(4), 109(1), 126(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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 him, in accordance with law, under 4 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 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