1 CGHC010263262026 2026:CGHC:30684 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6484 of 2026 Ramdas Baghel S/o Late Budharu Baghel, Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Jora, Near Hanuman Mandir, P.S. Telibhandha, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Vidhan Sabha, Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Muskaan Fatwani, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shubham Bajpai, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 20.07.2026 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. 67/2026 registered at Police Station Vidhan Sabha, Raipur, District - Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 109(1) and 117(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’). 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant, Chandra Shekhar Kosle, lodged a report alleging that on 20.02.2026, at about 1:00 p.m., the present applicant went to the parental house of RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 his wife, Champa Bai Baghel, situated at Village Semariya, and, suspecting that she had gone there without informing him, started abusing and assaulting her. It is alleged that the applicant assaulted Champa Bai Baghel with a wooden stick, causing injuries on her head with an intention to cause her death. It is further alleged that when Maharin Kosle, Dharamdas Kosle, and Veena Sambhakar intervened to rescue her, the applicant also assaulted them, resulting in injuries. On the basis of the said allegations, the present crime was registered against the applicant for offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Vidhan Sabha, District Raipur. During the course of investigation, Sections 109(1) and 117(2) of the BNS, 2023 were also added. The applicant was thereafter arrested in connection with the said offence. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, which has arisen out of a matrimonial dispute between the applicant and his wife. It is contended that the allegations are exaggerated and are matters to be tested during trial. It is emphatically argued that during the pendency of the proceedings, the principal injured witness, namely Smt. Champa Bai Baghel, who is the wife of the applicant, has amicably resolved the dispute with him and has voluntarily appeared before the Court through counsel and filed a sworn affidavit categorically stating that she has no objection if the applicant is released on bail. A copy of the application along with 3 the affidavit has been filed as Annexure A/3. She also submits that this subsequent development clearly reflects restoration of cordial relations between the spouses and substantially reduces the possibility of any threat, pressure, or influence being exerted upon the complainant or other prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that the dispute having emanated from matrimonial discord, the compromise arrived at between the parties is a significant circumstance which deserves due consideration. She further submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and he is in jail since 24.02.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time. Therefore, she prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel appearing for the respondent/State opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case before the competent Court. He further submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature, involving an assault upon his wife resulting in injuries on her head, as well as injuries to other persons who intervened in the incident. It is contended that the compromise or no-objection expressed by the wife at a subsequent stage does not dilute the gravity of the offence alleged against the applicant. Therefore, considering the nature and seriousness of the allegations, it is prayed that the bail application be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the dispute appears to have arisen out of matrimonial discord between the applicant and his wife, and further taking into consideration the subsequent development that the principal injured witness, namely Smt. Champa Bai Baghel, who is the wife of the applicant, has voluntarily appeared before the Court and filed an affidavit (Annexure A/3) stating that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved and that she has no objection to the applicant being released on bail, and further considering the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, he is in jail since 24.02.2026, and charge-sheet has been filed in the present case, and conclusion of the trial may take some time, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant- Ramdas Baghel, involved in Crime No. 67/2026 registered at Police Station Vidhan Sabha, Raipur, District - Raipur, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 109(1) and 117(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 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 5 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 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