1 CGHC010210102026 2026:CGHC:28997 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4918 of 2026 Omprakash Yadav @ Ullu S/o Late Rajesh Yadav Aged About 27 Years R/o Village - Ward No. 17, Gasti Chowk, Kosmanda, Police Station - Champa, District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station- Champa, District - Jangir - Champa (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Parasmani Shriwas, Advocate For Non-Applicant : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 10/07/2026 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.61/2026, registered at Police Station Champa, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offences punishable under the relevant provisions of the B.N.S. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 11.02.2026, the complainant, namely, Mahendra Rathore, lodged a written KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 complaint before Police Station Champa, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), alleging, inter alia, that his nephew, Vedant Rathore, was present in front of Amit Auto Parts, Kosmanda Chowk, Main Road, when the present applicant, on account of previous enmity, reached there, abused him in filthy language and assaulted him with a knife, causing serious injuries. On the basis of the said written complaint, the concerned Police registered the aforesaid crime against the present applicant. During the course of investigation, the injured was medically examined and, thereafter, the present applicant surrendered and was arrested by the concerned police authorities. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He submits that the alleged incident occurred on account of previous enmity between the parties and the applicant has been unnecessarily roped in. He further submits that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. It is further submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 06.03.2026. Learned counsel fairly submits that although two previous criminal antecedents have been reflected against the applicant, both the cases have already culminated in acquittal and the same have been duly explained in Part-D (Criminal Antecedents) of the present bail application. Therefore, he prays that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 3 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is sufficient material available on record to prima facie establish the involvement of the present applicant in the alleged offence. He further submits that the present applicant assaulted the injured with a knife, as a result of which the injured sustained grievous injuries. However, though the injuries are grievous in nature, they have been opined to be not dangerous to life. He further submits that considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, the manner in which the offence was committed, the weapon used in the commission of the offence and the material collected during the course of investigation, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. Therefore, he prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the present applicant and the fact that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, as per the MLC report of the injured, the injuries sustained are grievous in nature, though not dangerous to life. Further, the applicant is in judicial custody since 06.03.2026 and no further custodial interrogation is required. Though two previous criminal antecedents have been reflected against the applicant, both have already culminated in acquittal, as duly explained in Part-D (Criminal Antecedents) of the present bail application and further 4 the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant -Omprakash Yadav @ Ullu, involved in Crime No.61/2026, registered at Police Station Champa, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offences punishable under the relevant provisions of the 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 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 5 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. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal