1 2026:CGHC:26864 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5638 of 2026 Beeru Chouhan @ Pyare Lal S/o Jageshwar Chouhan Aged About 33 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Kokaditarai, P.S. Kotra Road, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through P.S. Kotra Road, Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01/07/2026 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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 493/2025 registered at Police Station- Kotra Road, District- Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3),115(2), 119(1) and 309(4) of B.N.S. 2. Case of the prosecution in brief is that on 13.12.2025, at about 11:30 A.M., the complainant along with his friend, namely Dev KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 Prashad, was standing near a liquor shop when the present applicant allegedly reached there in an intoxicated condition, abused them in filthy language and assaulted them with hands and fists, as a result of which the complainant sustained injuries on his left eye, back and stomach. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant, the police registered the FIR. During the course of investigation, the supplementary statements of the complainant and other witnesses were recorded wherein it was alleged that, at the time of the incident, the applicant had demanded money from the complainant for consuming liquor and had also robbed his mobile phone. Consequently, Crime No. 493/2025 was registered against the applicant for the aforesaid offences. 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 the allegations of robbery are an afterthought inasmuch as the FIR, as initially lodged by the complainant, contains no allegation whatsoever regarding theft or robbery of the mobile phone and the said allegation surfaced only in the supplementary statements recorded during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that no Test Identification Parade (TIP) of the alleged recovered mobile phone has been conducted, thereby rendering the alleged recovery doubtful. Learned counsel further submits that initially the police had registered the offence under Sections 296, 351(2) and 115(2) of the BNS and subsequently, at the time of filing of the charge-sheet, Sections 119(1) and 309(4) of the BNS were added. It is also 3 submitted that the dispute had arisen on account of demand of liquor near the liquor shop and owing to the said altercation, the complainant has falsely implicated the applicant by introducing exaggerated allegations at a later stage. It is further submitted that there are only eight prosecution witnesses, out of whom two witnesses have already been examined and their testimony does not fully support the prosecution case. So far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, it is submitted that though the applicant has 22 criminal antecedents, the same have been duly explained in Part-D of the present bail application and, out of them, only Crime No. 224/2020 and one Istgasa No. 1/22 are pending, whereas all the remaining cases have already been disposed of. It is, therefore, submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 24.12.2025, the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude and, therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. It is submitted that during the course of investigation, the robbed mobile phone of the complainant has been recovered from the possession of the present applicant, which lends substantial corroboration to the prosecution case. It is further submitted that the applicant is a habitual offender having as many as 29 criminal antecedents, out of which Crime No. 224/2020 and Istgasa No. 1/22 are still pending, while the remaining criminal cases only stand disposed of and cannot be treated as a clean 4 antecedent. It is submitted that the applicant's criminal history clearly reflects his propensity to commit offences and, therefore, considering the nature of allegations, the recovery effected from his possession and his extensive criminal antecedents, no indulgence is warranted in his favour and the application deserves to be rejected. 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, nature and gravity of the offence, period of detention of the applicant since 24.12.2025, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, the recovery made from the possession of the applicant and also considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant which have been explained in Part-D of the present bail application, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to allow the present application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Beeru Chouhan @ Praye Lal, involved in Crime No. 493/2025 registered at Police Station- Kotra Road, District- Raigarh (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3),115(2), 119(1) and 309(4) of B.N.S., 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 5 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 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 6 open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. dorthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal