1 2026:CGHC:26942 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3483 of 2026 Arjun Sahu S/o- Santram Sahu, Aged About 22 Years R/o- Shiv Chowk, Ward No. 51, Lalpur, P.S Tikrapara, District-Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Station House Officer Of Police Station - Tikrapara, District – Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Sachin Nidhi and Mr. Aishwarya Diwan, Advocates. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 01.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second 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. 858/2025, registered at Police Station – Tikrapara, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 296 and 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. Earlier, the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2026 passed in MCRC No.1919/2026, on merits. RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 3. The case of the prosecution, is that on 21.10.2025, when the complainant was passing from Lalpur, a quarrel broke out between the applicant along with co-accused Mukesh Sahu, due to throwing of burning cigarette on the complainant. It is further alleged that the applicant and co-accused abused and threatened to kill the complainant. After that, both the accused and co- accused blocked their way and abused and started beating with their hands and fists. Also the present applicant Arjun assaulted the complainant with a sharp object on chest, stomach and back of the complainant. That On the basis of aforesaid story of the prosecution an FIR was lodged against the present applicant. 4. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2026 passed in MCRC No.1919/2026 on merits, but the ground for filing this second bail application is that so far as the criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, there is one criminal case registered against him and the same is ended in acquittal, and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 40 prosecution witnesses, none has appeared before the trial Court till date for their examination. The applicant is in jail since 23.10.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the applicant is said to have assaulted the injured with knife, and the injured has sustained the injuries which are grievous in nature, and the knife allegedly used in the offence was recovered from the possession of the applicant. Therefore, this bail 3 application is liable to be rejected. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2026 passed in MCRC No.1919/2026 on merits, but the ground for filing this second bail application is that so far as the criminal antecedent of the applicant is concerned, there is one criminal case registered against him and the same is ended in acquittal, and so far as the status of the trial is concerned, out of 40 prosecution witnesses, none has appeared before the trial Court till date for their examination, the applicant is in jail since 23.10.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Accordingly, this second bail application is allowed. 9. Let applicant – Arjun Sahu, involved in Crime No. 858/2025, registered at Police Station – Tikrapara, District – Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 126(2), 296 and 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 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 4 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 open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 10. 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 Rajshekhar