1 CGHC010162202026 2026:CGHC:29387 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 4121 of 2026 Bhanu Prakash Nishad S/o Bhuneshwar Nishad Aged About 18 Years R/o Village Borsi, P.S. Fingeshwar, Distt. Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Pooja Yadav, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 03/2026 registered at Police Station- Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 109(1), 3(5), 190, 191(1)(2)(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 07.01.2026, the complainant Hulas Sahu lodged a report at Police Station RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Fingeshwar alleging therein that on the night of 06.01.2026, during the Madai (market) held at Village Borsi, the accused persons namely Krishna Sahu, Lokesh Yadav, Akash Nishad and their companions, including the present applicant, abused the injured Gaindlal Sahu with filthy language and assaulted him by hand and fist. It is further alleged that co-accused Krishna Sahu inflicted knife injuries on the abdomen and back side of the injured Gaindlal Sahu, due to which he sustained serious injuries. Thereafter, the injured was immediately taken to Fingeshwar Hospital for primary treatment and subsequently referred to Vaidehi Hospital, Mahasamund for better treatment. On the basis of the said report, FIR bearing Crime No. 03/2026 was registered against the accused persons at Police Station Fingeshwar, District Gariaband, and during the course of investigation, the present applicants were also implicated in the alleged offence. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is submitted that the name of the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR and no specific allegation regarding causing knife injury has been made against them. As per the prosecution case itself, the knife injury was allegedly inflicted by the juvenile co-accused, whereas the role attributed to the present applicant is only that they assaulted the injured by hand and fist during the quarrel. It is further submitted that no incriminating article has been seized from the possession of the applicant and the material collected during investigation is not sufficient to prima facie establish his involvement 3 in the grievous assault. She further submits that the juvenile co- accused, who is alleged to have caused the knife injury to the injured Gaindlal Sahu, has already been granted bail by the trial Court. She further submits that similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Lokesh Yadav @ Bittu Yadav, Akash Nishad, Dinesh Kumar Sahu, and Jhanendra Sahu have already been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 07.05.2026 in MCRC Nos. 2658/2026 and 2998/2026 respectively. She also submits that the applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent which is pending and he is in jail since 09.01.2026, the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, but could not dispute the fact that co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, the fact that though the present applicant is alleged to have assaulted the injured Gaindlal Sahu by hand and fist during the incident, however, as per the prosecution case, the specific allegation of inflicting knife injuries upon the 4 injured is attributed to the juvenile co-accused, who has already been granted bail by the competent Court, and further considering the fact that the other co-accused persons, namely, Lokesh Yadav @ Bittu Yadav, Akash Nishad, Dinesh Kumar Sahu, and Jhanendra Sahu have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 07.05.2026 in MCRC Nos. 2658/2026 and 2998/2026 respectively, and the case of present applicant is identical to that of the co- accused persons, further the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, the present applicant has only one previous criminal antecedent which is pending and he is jail since 09.01.2026, the conclusion of the trial will take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant – Bhanu Prakash Nishad, involved in Crime No. 03/2026 registered at Police Station- Fingeshwar, District- Gariyaband, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 109(1), 3(5), 190, 191(1)(2)(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local 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 5 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 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 provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan