1 2026:CGHC:26320 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5634 of 2026 1. Anand Sonkar S/o Subhash Sonkar Aged About 27 Years R/o Koiriyapara Mau (Uttar Pradesh) At Present Under Fly Over, Near Post Office, P.S. Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 2. Firoza @ Simran D/o Abdul Qadir Aged About 25 Years R/o Under Fly Over, P.S. Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) .. Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29.06.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 0141/2026 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 109(1), 119(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, Crime No. 141/2026 was registered at ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.06.30 11:04:38 +0530 2 Police Station Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon, for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 109(1), 119(1), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the report lodged by the complainant, Sanjay Mandavi. It is alleged that on the intervening night of 03.03.2026, a dispute arose near the Flyover, Post Office Chowk, Rajnandgaon, wherein the present applicants, along with the co-accused persons, allegedly demanded money from the complainant for consuming liquor and, upon his refusal, assaulted the complainant and his family members by means of a wooden stick and a fibre cane. It is further alleged that the complainant and his family members sustained injuries and were admitted to the Government Medical College Hospital, Rajnandgaon, for treatment. During the investigation, statements of witnesses were recorded under the provisions of the BNSS. Certain articles, including a wooden stick and a fibre cane, were allegedly seized and sent for forensic examination. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge- sheet has been filed before the learned jurisdictional Court, and the case is presently pending trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. He further submits that the complainant, Sanjay Mandavi, and his family members themselves have criminal antecedents. On 03.03.2026, the complainant, who had been incarcerated for a long period, was released from jail. Thereafter, the complainant picked a quarrel with the applicants, and in the said incident, it was Applicant No. 1 who sustained injuries on his head and was medically examined. Despite the applicants being the victims, the police of Police Station Kotwali arrested the applicants and implicated them as accused persons, which is a patent illegality. He also submits that the incident, even according to the 3 prosecution story, arose out of a sudden quarrel, and there is no material to indicate any pre-planned or premeditated intention on the part of the applicants. He submits that no specific overt act causing any particular grievous injury has been attributed to the present applicants, and the allegations levelled against them are general and omnibus in nature. The entire prosecution case is based upon the statements of interested witnesses belonging to the complainant’s side, and the correctness of such allegations can only be adjudicated during the course of the trial. He submits that the victims were discharged from Atal Bihari Vajpayee Memorial Government Medical College, Rajnandgaon, on 09.03.2026, having been admitted on 04.03.2026, which demonstrates that no life- threatening injuries were sustained. Importantly, it has been noted by the learned trial Court itself that the discharge was made at the request of the relatives of the patients and not because the doctors had certified full recovery, which further indicates the exaggerated nature of the prosecution case. He submits that though the applicant No. 1 has no criminal antecedents, applicant No. 2 has 06 criminal antecedents under the IPC and NDPS Act in which in 03 cases the applicant No. 2 has already been acquitted and remaining 03 cases are still pending, for which he has already been given explanation. He submits that the other co-accused person, namely, Vishakha, vide order dated 16.06.2026 in MCRC No. 3303 of 2026, has already been granted regular bail by this Court. Therefore, he submits that the present applicants are also entitled to be released on regular bail on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the co-accused person, namely, Vishakha, vide order dated 16.06.2026 in MCRC No. 3303 of 2026, has already been granted regular bail by this Court. Also considering the fact that the charge - sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and they are in jail since 16.05.2026 and 07.03.2026 respectively and the conclusion of the trial may take some more time. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Let the Applicants – Anand Sonkar and Firoza @ Simran, involved in Crime No. 0141/2026 registered at Police Station – Kotwali, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 351(3), 109(1), 119(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on their furnishing 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 they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during 5 trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the 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 applicants are 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 them 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 Abhishek