1 2026:CGHC:1651 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 240 of 2026 Asharam @ Dadu @ Goli S/o Hemraj Sahu Aged About 20 Years R/o Laxman Nagar, Gali No. 05, Near Lakhan Kirana Store, P.S. Gudiyari, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Gudiyari, Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 12.01.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First 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. 360/2025, registered at Police Station – Gudiyari, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant submitted a written complaint before the concerned police station stating that, on the date of the incident, there was a dispute between the parties on account of previous enmity, and thereafter the accused persons assaulted the PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.01.13 13:00:11 +0530 2 injured persons. Based on the said complaint, the police registered an offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 296, 351(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act against the present applicant and other accused persons. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is alleged that the applicant assaulted the injured with a knife, however, on the same day, the injured sustained grievous injuries. It is further submitted that the co-accused, namely, Prahlad Sahu has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.11.2025 passed in MCRC No. 9617/2025, further the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and has been in judicial custody since 06.08.2025. As the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that applicant assaulted the injured with a knife, however, on the same day, the injured sustained grievous injuries and as per the query report, it has been stated that due to lack of timely and proper medical treatment, there was a possibility of death. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, the period of detention undergone by the applicant, and the fact that the applicant is alleged to have assaulted the injured with a knife; however, on the same day, the injured sustained grievous injuries and, as per the 3 query report, it has been stated that due to lack of timely and proper medical treatment, there was a possibility of death; further considering that the applicant has been in judicial custody since 06.08.2025 and that the charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant - Asharam @ Dadu @ Goli, involved in Crime No. 360/2025, registered at Police Station – Gudiyari, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1), 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 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 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 4 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 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 against his in accordance with law. 8. 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 Preeti