1 2026:CGHC:20971 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4136 of 2026 1 - Aryan Alias Gyanendra Banjare S/o Raja Banjare Aged About 19 Years R/o Khairi Balodabazar, P.S. Balodabazar, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 2 - Satyanarayan Alias Sattu S/o Jagjivan Chelak Aged About 36 Years R/o Khairi Balodabazar, P.S. Balodabazar, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ...Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For State/ Non-applicant : Mr. Saumya Rai, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 05.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.05.06 20:26:05 +0530 2 regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 1032/2025, registered at Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar, Dist-Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 61(2), 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. That, as per the prosecution case in brief, on 17.10.2025 at about 07:30 PM, the complainant Ajay Dhruv along with his friends, namely Yogesh Sen, Rahul Sahu and Chudamani Sahu, were present near Bajrang Chowk when a dispute arose regarding one Krishna Bhardwaj. It is alleged that thereafter, the accused persons, namely Kartik Sayer, Sahil Sayer and other co-accused, formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted Ajay Dhruv and Yogesh Sen by fists, kicks, sticks and knives with an intention to kill. During the said incident, it is further alleged that one Harish Sayer was murdered. It is also the case of the prosecution that the present applicants were not named in the FIR and their names were subsequently implicated on the basis of a memorandum statement recorded on 24.01.2026, after a delay of about four months. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated and were not named in the FIR, their implication being based solely on memorandum 3 statements of co-accused, with no recovery from their possession. It is further submitted that injured Yogesh Sen himself was involved in an earlier incident wherein two persons, namely Harsh Sahaya @ Bhakaru, were done to death, in respect of which Crime No. 1009/2025 dated 18.10.2025 was registered against him and others under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 103(1), 109(1) and 3(5) of the BNS. It is argued that the present FIR has been lodged subsequently alleging assault by the applicants upon Yogesh Sen and Ajay Dhruv, though the injuries are simple in nature. It is also submitted that there are material contradictions in the prosecution case, delay in lodging the FIR, and no evidence connecting the applicants with the alleged offence. The applicants are in custody since 08.03.2026 and, considering that the trial will take time and there is no likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence, they pray for grant of regular bail. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the allegations against the applicants are serious in nature and they have been specifically implicated during the course of investigation. It is contended that there is sufÏcient material available on record connecting the applicants with the commission of the offence, and the statements of witnesses clearly support the prosecution case. It is further submitted that the plea 4 of false implication taken by the applicants is not tenable at this stage. Learned counsel also submits that, so far as antecedents are concerned, applicant No.1 has no criminal antecedents, whereas applicant No.2 has one criminal case to his credit. Considering the gravity of the offence and the manner in which it has been committed, it is prayed that the applicants are not entitled to the benefit of bail and the application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Accordingly, considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the fact that the applicants were not named in the FIR and their implication is based mainly on memorandum statements of co-accused, coupled with absence of any recovery from their possession and the injuries being simple in nature. Further, taking into account that the applicants are in custody since 08.03.2026, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take considerable time, and also considering that applicant No.1 has no criminal antecedents while applicant No.2 has only one criminal case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and it is directed that the applicants be released on bail, I am inclined to allow this application. 5 7. Let applicants- Aryan alias Gyanendra Banjare, & Satyanarayan alias Sattu involved in Crime No.1032/2025, registered at Police Station City Kotwali Balodabazar, Dist-Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 61(2), 111 of the Bharatiya 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 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 6 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 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. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. OfÏce is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Arpan