1 CGHC010281162026 2026:CGHC:32341 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6787 of 2026 1. Shankhu Tandon S/o Dosram Tandon Aged About 40 Years R/o Singhanpur, Police Station Kosir, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 2. Manoj Banjare S/o Bhedram Banjare, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Singhanpur, Police Station – Kosir, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 3. Jageshwar Tandon S/o Late Budhram Tandan Aged About 50 Years R/o Singhanpur Police Station Kosir, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) (Description Of Applicants Mentioned As Per Arrest Memo) ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Station House Officer, Police of Police Station - Kosir, District - Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Respondents For Applicants : Mr. Raghuvendra Pradhan, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Sumit Singh, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28/07/2026 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 47/2026 registered at Police Station - Kosir, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 351(3), 191(3), 190, 118(1) and 296 of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 31.03.2025 at about 1:00 PM, PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.29 11:32:02 +0530 2 the complainant, Hemkumar Lahare, along with approximately 50–60 villagers, had gone from Saraiva to Mirauni Dam, Singhnapur, for a picnic. It is alleged that at about 4:00–5:00 PM, while the complainant was changing his clothes after taking a bath, the present applicant and other co-accused persons, who were allegedly present near a shop situated beneath the bridge of Mirauni Dam, picked up a quarrel with the complainant party, abused them in filthy language, and thereafter formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the complainant and his companions with knives, sticks and iron rods, causing injuries to them. It is further alleged that the accused persons also criminally intimidated the complainant party by threatening to kill them if they did not leave the place. Thereafter, the applicants were arrested on 02.04.2026. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have not committed any offence and they have been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that during the course of hearing of the bail application before the learned trial Court, the complainant personally appeared and did not raise any objection to the grant of bail to the present applicants. He also submits that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 6051/2026. Further, the applicant No. 1 has one previous criminal antecedent under the Istagasa, applicant No. 2 has three previous criminal antecedents and applicant No. 3 has two previous criminal antecedents, out of which in one case he has been acquitted, the same has been explained in part – D of this bail application. He later submits that the applicants are in jail since 02.04.2026, the applicants have no criminal antecedents, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of 3 bail to the applicants on the ground of parity. 4. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present case. However, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons, whose cases are identical to that of the present applicants, have already been granted bail by this Court. He further submitted that the criminal antecedents of the applicant have been explained in Part D of the present bail application. 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, and the fact that the co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.07.2026 passed in MCRC No. 6051/2026 and the complainant personally appeared and did not raise any objection to the grant of bail to the present applicants, further considering the fact that the criminal antecedents of the applicant have been explained in Part D of the present bail application and the charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case on the ground of parity. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicants Nos. 1, 2 and 3 - Shankhu Tandon, Manoj Banjare and Jageshwar Tandon, respectively involved in Crime No. 47/2026 registered at Police Station - Kosir, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 351(3), 191(3), 190, 118(1) and 296 of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court 4 concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants 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 them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti