1 CGHC010138722026 2026:CGHC:31012 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3360 of 2026 Sanni Pandey @ Ajay Pandey S/o Narendra Pandey Aged About 32 Years Resident Of Village- Lalpur Near M.M.I. Hospital P.S. Tikrapara District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer Police Station Tikrapara District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 21.07.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 855/2025, registered at Police Station : Tikrapara, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 109 and 3(5) of B.N.S. 2023. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21.10.2025, at about 03:00 PM, the complainant, Sudesh Chand Tandi, along with his KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 cousin (maternal uncle's son), Krishna Abhishek Vibhar, had gone to watch the Gaura-Gauri procession near Sheetla Talab, Lalpur. At that time, the present applicant/accused, Sunny Pandey, along with his associates, was allegedly engaged in a quarrel and assault with some other boys. When the complainant and Krishna Abhishek Vibhar approached the spot to see what was happening, the applicant and his associates wrongfully presumed that they were also involved in the altercation. Thereafter, they allegedly abused them in filthy language, threatened to kill them and assaulted them with fists, kicks and stones. It is further alleged that the applicant, Sunny Pandey, who was carrying an iron hammer, assaulted Krishna Abhishek Vibhar several times on his head with the intention of causing his death, thereby inflicting grievous head injuries. The complainant also sustained injuries on his left cheek and left shoulder during the assault. As Krishna Abhishek Vibhar suffered serious head injuries and started bleeding profusely, he was immediately admitted to Ramakrishna Hospital, Pachpedi Naka, for medical treatment. On the basis of the aforesaid report lodged by the complainant, Crime No. 855/2025 was registered against the present applicant/accused at Police Station Tikrapara for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present case arises out of an incident took place on 21.10.2025, in respect whereof cross FIRs were registered by both sides. It is submitted that, from the side of the present applicant, an FIR was also lodged 3 by the injured Ratan Soni against the complainant party for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 12(2), 296 and 3(5) of the BNS, wherein Arjun Sahu, Mukesh and their other associates were specifically named as accused. It is further submitted that one of the accused in the cross case, namely Arjun Sahu, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 3483/2026. Learned counsel further submits that since both sides sustained injuries during the incident and cross cases have been registered, the present applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail. It is further contended that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous enmity with the injured. He has neither assaulted the injured nor committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. There is no reliable material to connect the applicant with the alleged crime and no prima facie case is made out against him. It is also submitted that there is no independent eyewitness to the incident and the prosecution case rests only on circumstantial allegations. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 23.10.2025, the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude and his continued incarceration would cause undue hardship and seriously prejudice the livelihood of his family members. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are specific and serious allegations against the present applicant. It is contended that the 4 injured in the present case sustained grievous injuries on the frontal bone of his head and as per the query report, the said injuries have been opined to be grievous in nature. It is further submitted that the weapon of offence, an iron hammer, was recovered and seized from the possession of the present applicant during the course of investigation, which lends substantial support to the prosecution case. She further submits that the applicant is not a first-time offender and has four criminal antecedents, out of which two cases have already been disposed of, while two criminal cases pertaining to the years 2022 and 2023 are still pending against him. It is also pointed out that the applicant has not disclosed the aforesaid criminal antecedents in the present bail application. Considering the gravity and nature of the allegations, the grievous injuries sustained by the injured/victim, the recovery of the weapon from the applicant, and his criminal antecedents, it is prayed that the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case- diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations and the fact that the present case arises out of an incident dated 21.10.2025 in respect whereof cross FIRs have been registered by both sides, it transpires that from the side of the present applicant also, an FIR came to be lodged by the injured Ratan Soni against the complainant party for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 12(2), 296 and 3(5) of the BNS, wherein Arjun Sahu, Mukesh and their other associates were 5 named as accused. It further transpires that Arjun Sahu has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 01.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 3483/2026. Further considering that both sides are alleged to have sustained injuries in the same incident, the period of incarceration of the applicant since 23.10.2025, the stage of trial, the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time to conclude and also considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant, thus without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Sanni Pandey @ Ajay Pandey, involved in Crime No. 855/2025, registered at Police Station : Tikrapara, Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 109 and 3(5) of B.N.S. 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 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 6 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal