1 2026:CGHC:7910 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No.490 of 2026 Rajendra Yadav S/o Late Shankar Yadav Aged About 33 Years R/o Dongargaon, P.S. And Tehsil Dongargaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgrh. ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Dongargaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Prateek Singh Thakur, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Ms. Smiti Shrivastava, PL Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 12.02.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 1st Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.02.13 19:38:12 +0530 2 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No.363/2025 registered at Police Station – Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 191(2), 49 and 109 of BNS and also under Sections 294, 323, 147, 109 and 307 of IPC. 2. According to the case of prosecution, on 21.11.2025 at about 17:53 hours, a written complaint was lodged by Yogesh Kumar Dewangan alleging that on 20.11.2025 at around 8:30 p.m., accused Rahul Yadav and other co-accused persons assaulted his guests with a rod and a balli (wooden stick). It is stated that the guests namely Surendra Navle, Vijay Gangaji Bawne, Ranjit Shaligram Deshmukh and Bhogde, had gone near Gautam Hotel to have betel leaves (pan). At that time, Yogesh Kumar Dewangan questioned Bhanu Yadav as to why his son had slapped him during the time of Ganesh Puja. Upon hearing this, Rahul Yadav and the other accused persons became agitated and attacked the said guests with the rod and wooden stick, causing injuries. It is further alleged that Surendra Navle sustained injuries on his left hand and head, while the other injured persons also suffered grievous injuries. Based on the said allegations, the offences, as mentioned above, have been registered against the present 3 Applicant. Hence, this application. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, who is under incarceration since 08.12.2025. He further submits that the FIR was lodged against six accused persons and the name of the Applicant does not find place therein. It is contended that during the course of investigation, pursuant to the statement of complainant under Section 180 of BNSS, 203, his name has come into light and the injured persons are relatives of complainant, who is from Nagpur. It has been further submitted that the case of the Applicant is distinguishable from that of the co-accused, who were named in the FIR. He lastly submits that the Applicant is a Government employee and conclusion of trial is likely to take quite some time, therefore, he may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is only one previous criminal antecedent against the Applicant. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary, this Court finds that the name of the present Applicant does not appear in the FIR and has surfaced only during the course of investigation on the basis of the 4 statement recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS, 2023. Further considering that the Applicant is in custody since 08.12.2025, is stated to be a Government employee, his case is distinguishable from that of the co-accused named in the FIR and further considering that conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the overall facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to allow the application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 6. Let Applicant- Rajendra Yadav involved in Crime No.363/2025 registered at Police Station – Dongargarh, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 191(2), 49 and 109 of BNS and also under Sections 294, 323, 147, 109 and 307 of IPC 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 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 5 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. 7. 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 Priya