1 CGHC010291182026 2026:CGHC:33172 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6953 of 2026 Naresh Ratre S/o Radhe Lal Ratre, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Village Bhatgaon, P.S. Mujgahan, District- Raipur, (C.G.) (Father Name Correctly Mentioned As Radhelal Instead of Radheshyam) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station P.S. Mujgahan, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 31/07/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 78/2026 registered at Police Station - Mujgahan, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 333, 296, 351(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant, who is the Sarpanch, lodged a report alleging that on 07.04.2026, the applicant and the other co-accused persons, in an intoxicated state, entered the complainant's house and started abusing and threatening him. It is PREETI KUMARI Digitally signed by PREETI KUMARI Date: 2026.07.31 15:29:39 +0530 2 alleged that the incident occurred on account of a dispute arising from the fact that the complainant had earlier lodged a complaint with the police against the applicant and the other co-accused persons, pursuant to which their motorcycles were seized. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that the complainant did not sustain any injuries, nor is there any statement of an independent witness supporting the complainant's version, which prima-facie indicates that no offence is made out against the present applicant. It is also submitted that there is an unexplained delay of two days in lodging the FIR. Further, the applicant has been in judicial custody since 14.05.2026. He also submits that the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents, the details of which have been duly explained in Part D of the present bail application. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed. She further submits that the applicant has three previous criminal antecedents, the details of which have been duly explained in Part D of the present bail application. Therefore, it is contended that the applicant is not entitled to the grant of bail. 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 the offence, period of detention of the applicant since 14.05.2026, the fact that the charge-sheet has already been filed before 3 the competent Court, the criminal antecedents of the applicant has been explained in part-D of this bail application and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, this Court is inclined to allow the present application. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Naresh Ratre, involved in Crime No. 78/2026 registered at Police Station - Mujgahan, District- Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 333, 296, 351(2) and 3(5) 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 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 4 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 for necessary information and compliance. dirurt fo forthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Preeti