1 2026:CGHC:24115 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4329 of 2026 1 - Gajendra Sahu @ Gajju Sahu S/o Shri Santosh Sahu Aged About 20 Years R/o -Ajad Chowk Ward No. 11, Mandhar P.S. Vidhansabha Raipur District Raipur C.G. 2 - Bhavesh Yadav @ Nihal Yadav S/o Shri Ashok Yadav Aged About 22 Years R/o Ajad Chowk Ward No. 11, Mandhar P.S. Vidhansabha Raipur District Raipur C.G. ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station Vidhansabha District Raipur C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Siddhant Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 16.06.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No.29/2026, registered at Police Station – Vidhansabha, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and 25 & 27 of Arms Act. VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.06.17 17:53:33 +0530 2 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 20.01.2026, at about 08:30 pm, the complainant namely Govind Adil was talking with his fellow friends namely Neelmadi Adil, Nilesh Adil, Harsh Adil, Prashant Baghel, Rajeev Adil, and others in the ground of Mandhar school where Madhai fair was going on, in the meanwhile the present applicants along with two other persons namely Sharad and Khileshwar Yadav @ Nanu came over there and talked about theirold dispute and thereafter all of them unanimously abused the complainant along with his fellow friends with obscene language, threatened to kill him, caused injury them. Therefore, the complainant lodged an FIR against the present applicants in Police Station Vidhansabha, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) and in the due course of investigation the present applicants got arrested, Hence this bail application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that there is no material on record to suggest that applicants are habitual offender. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicants are in jail since 04.02.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are no previous criminal antecedents registered against the present applicants. She also submits that there are total three injured persons, and as per the MLC report, two injured received simple injuries and one injured sustained grievous injury, therefore, applicant is not entitled to release on bail. 3 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, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of injury sustained by the injured also considering the fact that charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, the applicants are in jail since 04.02.2026, and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, further considering the detention period of the applicants, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant No.1 - Gajendra Sahu @ Gajju and applicant No.2 – Bhavesh Yadav @ Nihal, involved in Crime No.29/2026, registered at Police Station – Vidhansabha, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and 25 & 27 of 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 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 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 4 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. 8. 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 Vaishali