1 CGHC010185722026 2026:CGHC:28961 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4375 of 2026 • Deenanath Dewangan S/o Dhanwa Dewangan Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Silhati, Police Station Lohara, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Sahaspur Lohara, District- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vinod Tekam, Government Advocate For Objector Dr. Surendra Kumar Dewangan, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 10.07.2026 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. 28/2026, registered at Police Station – Sahaspur Lohara, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 76, 296, 115(2), 351(3) of BNS, 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that 04.03.2026, on the occasion of the Holi festival, a dispute allegedly arose between the parties. It is alleged in the First Information Report bearing Crime No. 28/2026 VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Digitally signed by VAISHALI LUCKY NAGARIA Date: 2026.07.14 18:24:20 +0530 2 registered at Police Station Sahaspur Lohara that at about 04:00 PM, the complainant Radhika Dewangan was proceeding towards her in- laws' house when the present applicant/accused allegedly intercepted her and assaulted her by hand and fist, abused her in filthy language, and extended threats. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the police registered the said FIR against the present applicant, hence, this bail application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that there is counter FIR has been registered and the allegation levelled against the applicant are vague, general and omnibus, lacking the essential ingredients required to attract the said offence. He further submits that the incident took place during Holi celebrations and clearly reflects a free fight between two groups, wherein members from both sides were equally involved and injury sustained by the injured are simple in nature. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. The applicant is in jail since 06.03.2026 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the Objector opposes the bail application and submits that injury sustained by the injured are simple in nature. He also submits that there are 25 previous criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, and details of the same are mentioned in the bail application, it appears that applicant is a habitual offender, therefore, applicant is not entitled for grant bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the 3 documents available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, also considering the fact that cross-complaints have been filed by both sides, and both parties have sustained injuries, and injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature, charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, the applicant is in jail since 06.03.2026, and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. Let applicant, Deenanath Dewangan, involved in Crime No.28/2026, registered at Police Station – Sahaspur Lohara, District – Kabirdham (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 74, 76, 296, 115(2), 351(3) of BNS, 2023, 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 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 4 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. 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 vaishali