1 2026:CGHC:11032 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 738 of 2026 Munsif Khan Urf Addu Patel S/o Maifooj Khan, Aged About 21 Years R/o Kasaridih Durg, Thana Padmanabhpur, District- Durg (C.G.) --- Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Somni, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Ayush Lall, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer MCRC No. 1637 of 2026 Shahrukh Hussain S/o Jakir Hussain Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Kasaridih Durg Police Station Padmanabhpur District Durg (C.G.) ---Applicant(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, Police Station Somni District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 03.03.2026 VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.03.03 16:58:11 +0530 2 1. The applicants have preferred these First Bail Applications under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.263/2025, registered at Police Station- Somni District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, a misunderstanding arising out of a late-night phone call led to a dispute between the complainant, Mohammad Hussain, and the accused persons. It is alleged that upon believing that his brother had been abused during the telephonic conversation, applicants went to the complainant’s dhaba armed with a hockey stick and a knife, where they allegedly abused the staff members, created a disturbance, and demanded that the owner be called to the spot. On the basis of the complainant’s report regarding the said incident, Crime No. 263/2025 was registered at Police Outpost Somni for offences punishable under the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act, and investigation was initiated. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not attracted against them and there is no cogent material or evidence connecting them with the alleged crime. Furthermore, no incriminating material has been seized from the applicants. So far as criminal antecedents of the applicants are concerned, the applicants have two criminal antecedents each, which have already been explained in para 4(A) of the bail applications. The charge-sheet has 3 already been filed and therefore their further custodial detention is not required for investigation. The applicant-Shahrukh Hussain is in jail since 02.12.2025 and applicant- Munsif Khan urf Addu Patel is in jail since 01.12.2025 and the conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, hence they pray for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant opposes the bail application of the applicants and also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicants. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the nature of allegations, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed, and looking to the period of detention of the applicants, who are in custody since 01.12.2025 and 02.12.2025 respectively, this Court is of the view that further custodial interrogation is not required at this stage. Without commenting on the merits of the case and taking into account the likely time for conclusion of trial, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the bail applications. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. 7. Let applicants, Munsif Khan urf Addu Patel and Shahrukh Hussain, involved in Crime No.263/2025, registered at Police Station- Somni District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25 and 27 of the Arms Act be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (each) in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are 4 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 applicants 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 them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 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 Section 209 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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. 8. Office 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 Vaishali