1 CGHC010280532026 2026:CGHC:31742 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6692 of 2026 Shatruhan Pandram S/o Dayaram Pandram Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Ghontha, Thana Pandatrai, District- Kabirdham Kawardha, C.G. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through P.S.- Pandatarai, District- Kabirdham Kawardha, C.G. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 24.07.2026 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. 59/2026 registered at Police Station Pandatarai, District- Kabirdham Kawardha, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 331(6) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. (for short ‘BNS’) 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 18.04.2026 at about 7:00 PM, the complainant, Umar Singh Maravi, was preparing food in his RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 house when, on account of previous enmity, the applicant/accused, Shatruhan Pandram, trespassed into his house and started abusing him in filthy language. The accused further threatened to kill the complainant and assaulted him with a wooden stick, causing injuries to his head and the toe of his right foot. As a result of the assault, the complainant sustained a bleeding injury on his head and an injury to the toe of his right foot. On the basis of the oral report lodged by the complainant, Police Station Pandatarai registered Crime No. 59/2026 against the accused for offences punishable under Sections 331(6), 296, 351(3), and 115(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. During the course of investigation, the accused was arrested and produced before the competent Court in accordance with law. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to previous enmity with the complainant. It is also submitted that, except for the offence punishable under Section 331(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, all the other alleged offences under Sections 296, 351(3), and 115(2) of the B.N.S. are bailable in nature. He also submits that the injuries allegedly sustained by the injured are simple in nature and the offences are triable by the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class. He further submits that no incriminating article has been seized from the possession of the applicant. It is fairly conceded that the applicant has two previous antecedents, bearing Crime No. 66/2020 registered at Police Station Pandatarai, District Kabirdham (Kawardha) for an offence 3 under Section 34(1)(A) of the Excise Act, which is stated to be pending, and Crime No. 40/2024 registered at the same police station under Sections 107 and 116(3) Cr.P.C., which has already been disposed of. It is further submitted that the applicant is about 50 years of age, earning his livelihood as a labourer, and has been in judicial custody since 18.04.2026. The investigation has already been completed and the charge-sheet has been filed before the learned trial Court, and trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of 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. She further submits that the applicant, on account of previous enmity, trespassed into the house of the complainant, abused him in filthy language, threatened to kill him, and assaulted him with a wooden stick, causing injuries on his head and right foot. Learned State Counsel submits that the material collected during investigation, including the statement of the complainant and the medical evidence, prima facie establishes the involvement of the applicant in the commission of the alleged offences. She has further pointed out that the applicant is a habitual offender and has as many as two more criminal cases registered in the years 2024 and 2025 are still pending against him. In view of the applicant’s criminal antecedents and the nature of allegations levelled against him, there is every likelihood of his repeating similar offences and influencing the prosecution witnesses if released on bail. Therefore, 4 considering the gravity of the offence and the antecedents of the applicant, it is prayed that the present bail application be rejected. 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 allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that though the allegation against the applicant is that, due to previous enmity, he trespassed into the complainant’s house, abused and threatened him, and assaulted him with a wooden stick, causing injuries on his head and right foot and It has also been pointed out by the State that the applicant has total four previous criminal antecedents, but it is also to be noted that the the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature, as reflected from the medical records, and no grievous or life- threatening injury has been reported and further the fact that the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court, the applicant is in jail since 18.04.2026 and the final conclusion of trial is likely to take some considerable time, therefore, without commenting anything on merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the Applicant- Shatruhan Pandram, involved in Crime No. 59/2026 5 registered at Police Station - Pandatarai, District- Kabirdham Kawardha, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 331(6) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- and one surety, subject to 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 against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, 6 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/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Rahul Dewangan