1 2026:CGHC:22362 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3257 of 2026 1. Bhanudas Vaishnav S/o Late Narayan Das Vaishnav Aged About 55 Years Resident Of Village Ponch, P.S. Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 2 - Vedprakash Vaishnav S/o Bhanudas Vaishnav Aged About 26 Years Resident Of Village Ponch, P.S. Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 3 - Vikas Kumar Vaishnav S/o Bhanudas Vaishnav Aged About 24 Years Resident Of Village Ponch, P.S. Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House OfÏcer, Police Of Police Station Baloda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ajay Ayachi, Advocate For State/ Non-applicant : Ms. Vaishali Mahilong, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.05.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.05.14 19:04:38 +0530 2 Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.116/2026, registered at Police Station – Baloda, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 119(1), 296, 351(2), 115(2), 118(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. Case of the prosecution story in brief is that on 16.03.2026 at about 9:30 PM, the present applicant/accused Vedprakash allegedly came in front of the house of complainant Subhash Das at Village Baloda and started abusing in filthy language while demanding money for purchasing liquor. Upon refusal, he allegedly caught hold of the complainant’s collar and assaulted him, whereafter co-accused Bhanudas and Vikas also reached the spot and all the accused persons allegedly abused and threatened the complainant and his family members. It is further alleged that co-accused Bhanudas assaulted Sudesh Das with a stick causing head injury, while the present applicant assaulted Santosh Das and Mangal Das with a sharp pointed object, resulting in injuries to them. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant, the concerned police registered the offence against the accused persons. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicants have neither committed nor participated in any offence as alleged and the material collected during investigation does not prima facie establish their involvement in the crime. Counsel further submits that the applicants are in judicial custody since 17.03.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time. It is also submitted that though two previous criminal antecedents were registered against applicant No.1, both the cases have already been disposed of, therefore he prays for grant of bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicants are involved in a serious offence of assault wherein the complainant party sustained injuries, including a head injury, due to the acts committed by the applicants in furtherance of their common intention, though the injuries are simple in nature. It is further submitted that the statements of injured witnesses and medical evidence collected during investigation prima facie establish the involvement of the applicants in the offence. Learned State counsel also pointed out that applicant No.1 has criminal antecedents and, considering 4 the nature and gravity of the allegations, the applicants are not entitled to the benefit of bail. Hence, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of allegations levelled against the applicants, and particularly taking into account that the injuries caused to the injured persons, including the head injury, are simple in nature, this Court is inclined to extend the benefit of bail to the applicants. Though two previous criminal antecedents were registered against applicant No.1, the same have already been disposed of. Considering further that the applicants are in judicial custody since 17.03.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, therefore, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this application deserves to be and is hereby allowed. 7. Let applicants, Bhanudas Vaishnav, Vedprakash Vaishnav, & Vikas Kumkar Vaishnav involved in Crime No. 116/2026, registered at Police Station – Baloda, District – Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 119(1), 296, 5 351(2), 115(2), 118(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), 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 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, 6 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 send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Arpan