1 2026:CGHC:8826 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1752 of 2026 Vinay Baghel S/o Sahadev Baghel Aged About 26 Years R/o - Street No. 06, Behind Servant Quater, Sector 09, Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg (C.G.) (Details Of Applicant Properly Not Mentioned In Cause Title Of Impugned Order Sheet) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - SHO, Police Station Bhilai Nagar, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Ms. Monika Thakur, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 19.02.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 2nd Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.02.20 09:50:34 +0530 2 connection with Crime No.192/2025 registered at Police Station Bhilai Nagar, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 191(2), 3(5), 118(1), 191(3), 190, 109 and 333 of BNS, 2023 as also under Sections 25 & 27 of Arms Act (Correspondence Sections in IPC are 294, 323, 506, 146/34, 324, 147, 149, 307 and 452). Earlier application has been rejected on merits vide order dated 24.09.2025 passed in M.Cr.C. No.7721/2025. 2. As per the prosecution story, on the night of 05.05.2025 at about 10:30 PM, the main accused Lingaraj, along with 4–5 companions, all armed with sharp knives, forcibly entered the house of the complainant. They allegedly dragged the victim, who was sleeping on a bed, by his hair and took him out onto the street, uttering threats such as, “How dare you call me; today we will kill you,” while also hurling obscene abuses. It is further alleged that the main accused Lingaraj, along with another co-accused, assaulted the injured persons, namely Pranshu and his friend Jassu by punching them and striking them with a sharp knife on the head and on various parts of the body from below the waist up to the knees, causing injuries. The dispute was eventually pacified through the intervention of the complainant’s husband. Upon the gathering of a crowd, Lingaraj and his companions fled from 3 the spot on a motorcycle and a scooter. The injured persons, Pranshu and Jassu, sustained serious injuries on vital parts of their bodies. Based on these allegations, offences as mentioned above have been registered against the present Applicant. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that during the course of trial, out of 22 witnesses, six have already been examined including the injured and memorandum witnesses. It is argued that the Applicant has been in custody since 07.05.2025, the role attributed to the Applicant is limited in nature, as he is alleged to have assaulted the injured only on the elbow. It is further contended that during the course of trial, the injured witness has not supported the prosecution case against the present Applicant and has instead attributed the knife assault to the main accused, who was armed with a sharp weapon and caused injuries to the injured person. He further submits that co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court and the trial is likely to take quite some time for its conclusion, therefore, he may be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application. 4 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, considering that the Applicant is in custody since 07.05.2025, the role attributed to him is limited in nature, as the allegation against him is confined to assault on the elbow, while the knife injury has been attributed to the main accused and the injured witness has not supported the prosecution case against the present Applicant during trial and further considering that the co-accused has already been granted bail and the conclusion of trial is likely to take time, without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to allow the application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 6. Let Applicant- Vinay Baghel involved in Crime No.192/2025 registered at Police Station Bhilai Nagar, District Durg (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 191(2), 3(5), 118(1), 191(3), 190, 109 and 333 of BNS, 2023 (Correspondence Sections in IPC are 294, 323, 506, 146/34, 324, 147, 149, 307 and 452) 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 5 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 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 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. 7. 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 Priya