1 CGHC010228042026 2026:CGHC:29202 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5563 of 2026 1 - Santram Nishad S/o Shri Sadhauva Nishad Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Rehuta, Thana And Tehsil- Mungeli, Distt- Mungeli (C.G.) 2 - Jagan Nishad S/o Shri Santram Nishad Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Rehuta, Thana And Tehsil- Mungeli, Distt- Mungeli (C.G.) 3 - Deepak Nishad S/o Shri Santram Nishad Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Rehuta, Thana And Tehsil- Mungeli, Distt- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- City Kotwali, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s)/ State : Ms. Ritika Verma, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board RUCHI YADAV Digitally signed by RUCHI YADAV 2 10/07/2026 1. The present is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNSS"), seeking grant of regular bail to the applicants, who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 88/2025 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali, Mungeli, District- Mungeli, (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115 (2), 351 (2), 3 (5), 118 (1) and 109 (1) of BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, Durjan Singh Thakur, lodged a report on 14.03.2025 alleging that at about 10:50 a.m., while he and his father were celebrating the festival of Holi in front of their house, the applicants/accused persons arrived at the spot. Owing to a previous enmity, they allegedly started abusing the complainant and his father in filthy language and assaulted them with clubs, causing injuries to the complainant and his father on their heads and fingers. Upon hearing the commotion, one Gulshan Nishad intervened in the matter, whereupon the accused persons also allegedly extended threats to the complainant with dire consequences. On the basis of the said report, the police registered the offence under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. During the course of investigation, Section 109 of the BNS was also added, and pursuant thereto, the applicants were arrested on 06.06.2026. 3 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the present case arises out of a free fight between the parties and that a counter case has also been registered in respect of the same incident. Learned counsel further submits that, at the time of registration of the FIR, offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 were registered against the applicants, and during the course of investigation, Section 109 of the BNS was subsequently added. It is further submitted that the injured did not sustain any internal injury. Learned counsel also submits that the applicants have remained in judicial custody since 06.06.2026, the investigation has been completed, and the charge-sheet has already been filed. Since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, it is prayed that the applicants be enlarged on regular bail. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that Applicant No. 2, Jagan Nishad, has two criminal antecedents whereas Applicant No. 3, Deepak Nishad, has one criminal antecedent. It is contended that, in view of their criminal antecedents and the nature of the allegations, the applicants do not deserve to be enlarged on regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the incident appears to have arisen out of a free fight and a counter case has also been registered in respect of the same occurrence, the injured is not alleged to have sustained any internal injury, the applicants have remained in judicial custody since 06.06.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the considered opinion that further pre-trial detention of the applicants is not warranted. Although Applicant No. 2 is stated to have two criminal antecedents and Applicant No. 3 one criminal antecedent, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the said antecedents, by themselves, are not considered sufficient to deny them the benefit of bail. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present bail application deserves to be and is hereby allowed. 7. Let the applicants, namely Santram Nishad, Jagan Nishad and Deepak Nishad, involved in Crime No. 88/2025 registered at Police Station- City Kotwali, Mungeli, District- Mungeli, (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115 (2), 351 (2), 3 (5), 118 (1) and 109 (1) of BNS, be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, subject to the following conditions:- 5 (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 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) 6 recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicants 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 them in accordance with law. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously from the receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Ruchi