1 2026:CGHC:22071 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2880 of 2026 Naveen @ Prakash Soni S/o Late Shri Nandu Soni Aged About 25 Years R/o Santoshi Nagar, Infront Of Shriram Ground, P.S. Tikrapara, Distt.- Raipur, C.G. (Father Name Is Wrongly Mentioned In Cause Title Of Order Sheet Correct Mentioned In Bail Application) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station- Devendra Nagar, Distt.- Raipur, C.G. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 11.05.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.325/2024 registered at Police Station – Devendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.05.14 18:40:23 +0530 2 Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 109, 3(5) of BNS and Section 25, 27 of Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 11.10.2024, the police received a secret information from an informer that the present applicant along with other co-accused persons abused and assaulted the complainant/injured Bunty with hands and fists and also extended threats of dire consequences. It is further alleged that as a result of the said assault, the complainant sustained injuries. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present offence was registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons. Hence, the FIR. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the trial is in progress and the injured witness, who has already been examined before the trial Court, and he has failed to identify the present applicant. The allegation of causing knife injuries is specifically against the co-accused namely Nikku, whereas the allegation against the present applicant is only of assault by hands and fists, therefore, the case of the present applicant is distinguished 3 from the case of the main accused. It is further submitted that the applicant is in custody since 11.10.2024 and has no previous criminal antecedents, hence he deserves to be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case before competent Court. He further submitted that from a perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant assaulted the injured with hands and fists, whereas the co-accused, Nikku assaulted the injured with a knife, but injured sustained injuries, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 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, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and the fact that the allegation against the applicant is only to the effect that he assaulted the injured with hands and fists, whereas the injuries sustained by the injured were allegedly caused by knife blows inflicted by the co-accused, Nikku @ Naresh Durga, also considering the fact 4 that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and is in judicial custody since 11.10.2024, and the case of the applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused persons, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Let applicant, Naveen @ Prakash Soni involved in Crime No.325/2024 registered at Police Station – Devendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 109, 3(5) of BNS and Section 25, 27 of Arms Act, 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 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 them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 5 (iii) In case, the applicant 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 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 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 Arpan