1 2026:CGHC:24725 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5324 of 2026 • Manoj Sahu @ Golu S/o Shri Rajkumar Sahu Aged About 26 Years R/o Ward No. 207, Tilda, P.S. Tilda - Newra, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant(s) versus • State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Tilda Newra, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Pragalbh Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.06.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 95/2026, registered at Police Station – Tilda-Newra, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 04.03.2026 an FIR was lodged b one Jethiya Yadav alleging therein that his son namely Kuleshwar VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.06.19 19:46:20 +0530 2 Yadav was assaulted by knife by the applicant, due to the dispute arose between them for putting colors at Holi festival due to which his son severally sustained injuries on abdomen and other body parts. 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 contended that there is no material evidence available on record to establish the involvement of the applicant in the alleged crime. He submits that the incident occurred during the Holi festival on account of a sudden and little dispute relating to application of festival colours and there was no prior preparation or intention on the part of the applicant to commit any offence. Learned counsel also submits that the AIIMS Raipur record mentions a history of physical assault by four known persons, which creates doubt regarding the prosecution story as the FIR and statements of witnesses allegedly attribute the assault to the applicant alone. It is further contended that most of the witnesses cited by the prosecution are not eyewitnesses to the actual incident and had only assisted in shifting the injured to the hospital. Learned counsel also submits that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet has already been filed on 05.03.2026 before the competent Court. Therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are specific allegations against the applicant regarding assault upon the injured. It is contended that the statement of the complainant and other witnesses, coupled with the 3 medical evidence available on record, prima facie establishes the involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence. Learned State counsel further submits that the nature of the allegations and the gravity of the offence, particularly the allegation of causing injuries with intention to commit murder, are serious in nature and injured sustained four injuries out of which two injury are simple in nature and two are grievous in nature. Hence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the case diary material, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant, this Court finds that there are specific allegations regarding assault upon the injured. The medical documents and statements collected during investigation disclose prima facie material requiring further examination during trial. The defence raised by the applicant regarding the circumstances of the incident, discrepancies in the statements of witnesses, and the manner of occurrence are matters which require appreciation of evidence at the stage of trial, also considering the fact that injured sustained four injuries, out of which two are simple in nature and two are grievous in nature, therefore I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. In view of above, the bail application of the applicant namely – Manoj Sahu, involved in Crime No.95/2026, registered at Police Station – Tilda-Newra, Raipur, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence 4 punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 109(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Vaishali