1 2026:CGHC:1197 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 103 of 2026 Neeraj Kumar Dhruv S/o Baldau Dhruv Aged About 35 Years R/o Ganeshpur, Chowki Birejhar, P.S. Kurud, District Dhamtari C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House OfÏcer, Chowki Birejhar, P.S. Kurud, District Dhamtari C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08.01.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 238/2025 registered at Police Chowki- Birejhar, Police Station- Kurud, District Dhamtari, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 109(1), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 06.10.2025, a named FIR was lodged by the complainant, Tekram Narang, against Indu @ Indrakumar and the present applicant alleging that on 04.10.2025, during the Dussehra festival when a Ramleela skit was RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 being performed at the Dussehra Ground, Village Ganeshpur, at about 01:50 a.m., the son of the complainant got into a heated altercation with the aforesaid accused persons. It is alleged that, as a result of the said dispute, the applicant along with the co-accused persons abused the deceased and assaulted him by fists and blows as well as with a sharp-edged weapon, causing serious injuries. In connection with the said incident, the applicant was arrested by the police of Chowki Birejhar, Police Station Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) on 13.10.2025 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 109(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and has been falsely implicated in the offence in question. She further submits that the applicant and the co-accused person were involved in the present case, and admittedly, as per the prosecution's case, it was the co-accused, namely, Indu @ Indrakumar who assaulted the injured with sharp- edged weapon (knife), the injuries sustained by the injured are grievous in nature, while the applicant is alleged to have accompanied the co-accused. She further submits that the co- accused persons namely Bhupesh Kumar Dhruv and Manoj Kumar Dhruv @ Mannu have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 10094/2025 vide order dated 09.12.2025, it is further submitted that the applicant is in jail since 13.10.2025, charge- sheet has already been filed, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. He further submits that the accused, along with other co-accused persons, assaulted the victim with a sharp-edged weapon (knife) and the injuries sustained by the injured are dangerous to life. He also submits that although the other co-accused persons have been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court, their names were not mentioned in the FIR, whereas the name of the present applicant was specifically registered in the FIR, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 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, the nature and gravity of the offence, the period of detention of the applicant since 13.10.2025, the fact that though the applicant and the co-accused persons were involved in the present case, and admittedly, as per the prosecution’s case, it was the co-accused, namely, Indu @ Indrakumar, who assaulted the injured with a sharp-edged weapon (knife), the injuries sustained by the injured are dangerous to life, while the applicant is alleged to have accompanied the co-accused, but the said act was attributed to the co-accused person. Further, the case of the present applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused, namely, Indu @ Indrakumar, who committed the said act. Further, the co-accused persons, namely, Bhupesh Kumar Dhruv and Manoj Kumar Dhruv 4 @ Mannu, have already been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 10094/2025 vide order dated 09.12.2025. Though those persons who have been granted bail by this Court, their names were not mentioned in the FIR, whereas the name of the present applicant was specifically registered in the FIR, but the present applicant’s role is only limited to assault by hand and fist, he has no criminal antecedent, and the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicant – Neeraj Kumar Dhruv, involved in Crime No. 238/2025 registered at Police Chowki- Birejhar, Police Station- Kurud, District Dhamtari, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 109(1), 3(5) of 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 5 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan