1 2026:CGHC:8843 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1670 of 2026 Sanjay Lahre S/o Ankalha Lahre (Late) Aged About 30 Years R/o Village- Dilippur, Police Station- Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The SHO, Police Station- Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai, (C.G.) … Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 19.02.2026 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. 318/2025 registered at Police Station Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh-Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 109 read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 01.07.2025, the complainant, Laxmi Prasad Gayakwad, lodged a written complaint at the concerned Police Station stating that on 30.06.2025 at about 8:30 PM, he had gone to the ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.02.19 17:36:04 +0530 2 shop of Jain Tondon to purchase gutkha. While there, he overheard that near Durga Manch, the present applicant along with co-accused Ajay Lahre was assaulting his father, Sunil Gayakwad. Upon receiving the said information, he immediately went to Durga Manch and saw the accused persons assaulting his father due to previous enmity. His mother, Sant Bai, was also intervening in the scufÒe. During the course of the maarpeet (assault), the present applicant allegedly assaulted the injured Sunil Gayakwad with an iron axe, striking him four times on the head, as a result of which he sustained injuries above both ears, on the forehead, and on a finger of his left hand. Further, the complainant’s mother, Sant Bai, also sustained head injuries while intervening in the incident. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, an FIR was registered for the offence punishable under Section 109 read with Section 3(5) of the BNS. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the true facts of the case are that on 30.06.2025, the complainant and his parents were assaulting the co- accused, Ajay Lahre, near Durga Manch, who happens to be the brother of the present applicant. When the present applicant intervened in order to rescue his brother, he was instead assaulted by the injured person. The matter was immediately reported to the Police, however, no action was taken thereon. He further submits that there is an unexplained delay in lodging the instant FIR against the present applicant. The implication of the present applicant in the alleged offence is an afterthought, which is evident from the manner in which the investigation has been conducted by the Police. He also submits that out of 13 prosecution witnesses, 7 have been examined so far, out of whom 6 prosecution witnesses, 3 including the complainant, the injured, and his wife, have not supported the case of the prosecution. He submits that injuries sustained by the injured were not life threatening, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he has been in jail since 02.07.2025, and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail in the present case. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge sheet has been filed before the competent Court. She submitted that the applicant assaulted injured, namely, Sunil Gayakwad with an iron axe, inflicting four blows on his head and causing injuries above both ears, on the forehead, and on a finger of his left hand. The complainant’s mother, Sant Bai, also sustained head injuries while intervening. She further submitted that the applicant has one criminal antecedent under the IPC, hence, considering the gravity of the offence, he is not entitled to regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that although the allegation against the applicant is that he assaulted the injured, namely Sunil Gayakwad, with an iron axe, inflicting four blows on his head and causing injuries above both ears, on the forehead, and on a finger of his left hand, and that the complainant’s mother, Sant Bai, also sustained head injuries while intervening, it appears from perusal of the NCCT head report of the injured, no internal injury was found. Further, the charge sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the applicant is in custody since 02.07.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be 4 released on regular bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Sanjay Lahre, involved in Crime No. 318/2025 registered at Police Station Khairagarh, District- Khairagarh- Chhuikhadan-Gandai (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 109 read with section 3(5) of the 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 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 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, 5 (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 Abhishek