1 2026:CGHC:5057 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 994 of 2026 Ravi Baghel S/o Late Shri Santosh Baghel Aged About 21 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Near Sai Mandir, Dhanora, P.S. Padmanabhpur, Tehsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through OfÏcer-In-Charge of Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. R.S. Patel, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.01.2026 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. 367/2025 registered at Police Station – Padmanabhpur, District Durg (C.G.) offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, the date of the incident is 19.10.2025 at about 11:30 P.M., when a sudden quarrel and scufÒe took place between the present applicant and other co-accused persons on a trivial issue. It ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.30 12:25:27 +0530 2 is alleged that during the said quarrel, the complainant arrived at the spot and got involved in the scufÒe. During the ongoing scufÒe, a friend of the complainant, namely Prem Yadav, intervened to stop the fight. As a result thereof, it is alleged that the present applicant inflicted an injury upon the victim, namely Prem Yadav, with a knife below his ribs. Pursuant thereto, a report was lodged by the complainant, on the basis of which the applicant and other co-accused persons were arrested. Thereafter, Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg, registered an offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), and 109 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 367/25 against the applicant. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the present applicant is a young boy, and if he is kept in jail for a longer period in a false case, his future will be adversely affected. He also submits that the applicant has been in jail since 20.10.2025 and has already undergone about three months of incarceration. If he is further incarcerated for a long period, his family will be adversely affected, as he is the source of their bread and butter. He further submits that the co-accused person, namely Parmanand Sahu, has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC No. 131/2026 vide order dated 08.01.2026. He submits that the medical report clearly records only superficial and lacerated wounds, and it further mentions that the victim was conscious. No grievous or life- threatening injury has been noted. He also submits that the prima facie medical report does not conclusively establish that the injuries were inflicted with such force or in such a manner as to attract an offence of extreme gravity. He submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 20.10.2025, conclusion of the trial may take sometime, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the 3 applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge sheet has been filed before the competent Court. She further submitted that although a co-accused, namely Parmanand Sahu, has been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 131 of 2026 vide order dated 08.01.2026, the case of the present applicant is distinguishable, as the allegation of assault is specifically against him. It is alleged that he assaulted the injured with a knife, causing grievous injury, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in the present 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 particularly the fact that although the allegation of assault is specifically against the present applicant, it is evident from the perusal of the case diary and the medical report that the injuries sustained by the injured are on a non-vital part of the body. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and has been in custody since 20.10.2025. The charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Further, a co-accused, namely Parmanand Sahu, has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 08.01.2026 passed in MCRC No. 131 of 2026. In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let the Applicant – Ravi Baghel, involved in Crime No. 367/2025 registered at Police Station – Padmanabhpur, District Durg (C.G.) offence 4 under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his 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 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 5 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