1 CGHC010234562026 2026:CGHC:32391 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 5664 of 2026 Balram Yadav S/o- Lallu Yadav, Aged About 39 Years R/o- Village Farhada, Bajrang Chowk, Police Station Seepat, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Seepat District-Bilaspur (C.G.) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Danish Ahmad Siddiqui, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State For Objector : : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Ms. Chanchal Verma, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 28.07.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 333/2026 registered at Police Station – Seepat District - Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 333, 351(3) & 108 of the BNS. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the complainant and her family had been residing for several years in a house situated on VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.07.29 14:34:41 +0530 2 government land at Bajrang Chowk, Village Farhada. It is alleged that on 23.05.2024, 24.05.2026, and again on 25.05.2026, the present applicant/accused, Balram Yadav, came to the complainant's house claiming that the land belonged to one Ramkali Yadav and demanded that the complainant's family vacate the premises. During the said incidents, the applicant allegedly abused the complainant and her husband in filthy language, threatened them with dire consequences, and assaulted the complainant with a stick. According to the prosecution, on account of the continuous threats, intimidation, and harassment allegedly meted out by the applicant, the complainant's husband, Kanak Patel, became mentally distressed and consumed pesticide. He was immediately shifted to SIMS Hospital, Bilaspur, where he was admitted for medical treatment. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a written report before the concerned police station, on the basis of which the present FIR was registered against the applicant and other accused persons, and the matter was taken up for investigation in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the allegations contained in the FIR, dated 29.05.2026, essentially arise out of a dispute relating to the possession of land and a residential house, which has been given a criminal colour. It is further submitted that even if the entire prosecution case is accepted at its face value, there is no specific allegation indicating any intentional instigation, active participation, or aid on the part of the applicant so as to attract the ingredients of Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. Learned counsel submits 3 that the prosecution material does not disclose any direct or proximate act of the applicant which compelled or provoked the complainant's husband to consume pesticide, and that mere altercations, abuse, or threats arising out of a property dispute, without any positive act of instigation, do not constitute the offence of abetment. It is also submitted that there is no allegation regarding any suicide note, written communication, or any other material to indicate that the applicant intended or instigated the complainant's husband to take such an extreme step. Further, the complainant's husband survived the incident and was admitted to the hospital for treatment, and therefore the applicability of the alleged offence is a matter to be adjudicated during trial. Learned counsel further submits that the investigation is substantially complete and the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. The applicant has been in judicial custody for a considerable period, the conclusion of the trial is likely to take time, and his continued detention would serve no useful purpose. It is lastly submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of the address mentioned in the cause title, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and he is ready and willing to abide by all such terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court while granting him regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel as well as learned counsel for the objector opposed the bail application and submitted that the applicant has seven criminal antecedents and charge-sheet has not yet been filed, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, and further taking into consideration that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed before the competent Court, that the applicant has remained in judicial custody since 31.05.2026, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a fit case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the present bail application deserves to be allowed. 7. Let the Applicant – Balram Yadav, involved in Crime No. 333/2026 registered at Police Station – Seepat District - Bilaspur (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 333, 351(3) & 108 of the BNS, be released on bail on his 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 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 his 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 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavor to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 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 Vaibhav