1 CGHC010200012026 2026:CGHC:28718 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4711 of 2026 1. Mohmmad Yasin S/o Julfikar Ali Aged About 20 Years R/o Shiv Nagar Handipara Near S. Kirana Store, Police Station Azad Chowk, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. Mohmmad Basarat S/o Julfikar Ali Aged About 26 Years R/o Shiv Nagar Handipara Near S. Kirana Store, Police Station Azad Chowk, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. Mohammad Ziyarat S/o Julfikar Ali Aged About 22 Years R/o Shiv Nagar Handipara Near S. Kirana Store, Police Station Azad Chowk, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station - Azad Chowk, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Shubham Tripathi, Advocate. For State/Non-applicant : Ms. Monika Singh Thakur, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 09.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.62/2026 registered at Police Station Azad Chowk, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 296, 3(5), 351(2) of the DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 BNS, 2023. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, complainant filed a complaint stating therein that on 28.03.2026 at 8:30 PM, I was walking along the roadside, listening to music on my earbuds, two persons on an Activa scooter passed close by me, I asked them to ride slowly, in response, the pillion rider gestured rudely at me. Thereafter, they stopped their vehicle in front of my house. When I approached them and reiterated my request for them to ride slowly, the pillion rider began arguing with me and hurling obscene, filthy language. Seeing this abuse, Siddharth Sharma, who was standing nearby, intervened, but they subjected him to similar obscene abuse as well. Subsequently, Hadi and three of his associates arrived there and taunted us and began abusing. When we objected, they all started assaulting us. Mohammad Yasin, Mohammad Basarat, and Mohammad Ziyarat immediately fetched a saw like weapon, a wooden club, and a piece of timber from their home with an intention to kill, they chased me for a considerable distance with the weapon, shouting that they would kill me. I managed to flee and save my life. Mohammad Hadi, Mohammad Yasin, Mohammad Basarat, and Mohammad Ziyarat assaulted Siddharth, when Siddharth's father, Ram Sharma and his uncle, Praveen Sharma, intervened to stop the fight, they were also assaulted. As a result of the assault, Ram Sharma sustained an injury to his head, and Praveen Sharma was injured on his arm. Base on above, case has been registered. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the present 3 case. He submits that there is a counter case arising out of the said incident and that both sides have sustained injuries. He further submits that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate that the injuries caused to the complainant and other witnesses are non-grievous in nature, which is also apparent from the medical examination reports of the complainant and other witnesses. He submits that the learned trial Court further failed to appreciate that this is a case of a counter FIR, wherein complainant himself had lodged an FIR in respect of the same incident as Crime No.63/2026 at Police Station Azad Chowk. It is also submitted that the learned trial Court failed to consider that a compromise has already been effected between both parties, whereby the family members of both sides have amicably resolved the dispute and have assured that such incidents will not recur in future, which is also relected in the order of the learned trial Court. It is further submitted that complainant and other co-accused persons have already granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.05.2026 in MCRC No.4669/2026. He further submits that the present applicants have no criminal antecedents and have been in jail since 29.03.2026. Since the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, he therefore prays for grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and 4 gravity of the offence, and further the fact that there are cross cases arising out of the incident and both sides have sustained injuries. Further considering the fact that in cross FIR other co-accused persons have already granted bail by this Court vide order dated 15.05.2026 in MCRC No.4669/2026, coupled with the fact that the charge sheet has already been filed before the competent Court in the present case and the applicants have been in jail since 29.03.2026, and as the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the instant bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicants – Mohammad Yasin, Mohammad Basarat and Mohammad Ziyarat, involved in Crime No.62/2026 registered at Police Station Azad Chowk, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 296, 3(5), 351(2) of the BNS, 2023, be released on bail on furnishing 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/she 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 their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fail to appear 5 before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, 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/her in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Deepti Jha