1 2026:CGHC:5722 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1102 of 2026 Harshit Nagare @ Rishi S/o Raj Kumar Nagare Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No. 38 Milpara, Near Yash Kirana Shop, P.S. City Kotwali, Distt. And Tehsil Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Durg Kotwali, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 02.02.2026 1. Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar counsel for the applicant submits that he has already filed his Vakalatnama; however, his name has not been shown in the cause list. He, therefore, seeks and is permitted to argue the matter. 2. This the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.107/2025 registered at Police Station – Durg Kotwali District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.02.03 11:41:27 +0530 2 115(2), 109, 3(5) of the BNS 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that applicant has caused injury to complainant Ashish Thakur for the purpose of committing murder and he has used a knife on abdomen but complainant has turned down and then injury was occurred at Right Leg and when the father of the complainant was trying to save then applicant has also caused injury upon his Left Leg. Thus he has committed the alleged offence. 4. It is submitted that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the MLC, the injuries sustained by the complainant Ashish Thakur and his father Dinesh Thakur are simple in nature and are not grievous, as specifically opined by the doctor on police query, and the injuries are confined to non-vital parts, namely the thighs. The incident allegedly arose out of a trivial issue when a child accidentally sprinkled water, leading to a minor dispute between the parties. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 11.03.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time. Further, the co-accused Sanjay Nagare, whose case stands on identical footing, has already been granted the benefit of bail by this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 6959/2025 vide order dated 04.09.2025, entitling the present applicant to the benefit of parity. The applicant undertakes to furnish adequate surety, to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge-sheet has 3 already been filed; he further submitted that the present applicant allegedly assaulted the injured, resulting in grievous injuries, therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be granted regular bail in the present case. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal of the case diary, this Court finds that, as per the MLC, the injuries sustained by the complainant Ashish Thakur and his father Dinesh Thakur are simple in nature and not grievous, as specifically opined by the doctor on police query, and the said injuries are confined to non-vital parts, namely the thighs. It is further noted that the co- accused Sanjay Nagare, whose case stands on identical footing, has already been granted the benefit of bail by this Hon’ble Court in MCRC No. 6959/2025 vide order dated 04.09.2025, entitling the present applicant to the benefit of parity. The charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and the applicant has been in judicial custody since 11.03.2025. Considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take a considerable time, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 8. Let the Applicant – Harshit Nagare @ Rishi, involved in Crime No.107/2025 registered at Police Station – Durg Kotwali District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 115(2), 109, 3(5) of the BNS 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 4 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 they 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 their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail 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 sufficient 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. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of further four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 10. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav