1 CGHC010299122026 2026:CGHC:34206 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7125 of 2026 1 - Manoj Kumar Gilgichcha S/o Late Narsaiya Aged About 28 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 2 - Manoj Dubba S/o Shankar Dubba Aged About 30 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 3 - Rahul Dubba S/o Dubba Rammurti Aged About 19 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 4 - Bichmaiya Dubba S/o Late Asaraiya Aged About 60 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 5 - Matti Hemant S/o Matti Shalaiya Aged About 22 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 6 - Dilip Paldev S/o Narsingh Rao Paldev Aged About 26 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 7 - Gilgichcha Ramchandra S/o Kantaiya Gilgichcha Aged About 30 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 8 - Amit Dubba S/o Dubba Basvaiya Aged About 29 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 9 - Dubba Ganpat S/o Ramaiya Dubba Aged About 50 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 10 - Ravi Yalam S/o Vishnu Yalam Aged About 22 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) 11 - Rahul Matti S/o Matti Harish Aged About 25 Years R/o Vangapalli P.S. Madded District- Bijapur (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station Madded Bijapur (C.G.) ... Non-applicant VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.06 10:59:13 +0530 2 For Applicants : Mr. Pravin Kumar Tulsyan, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Anusha Naik, Dy. Government Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 05.08.2026 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. 09/2026 registered at Police Station - Madded District - Bijapur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109 & 117(2) of the BNS. 2. According to the prosecution, the complainant Sunil Lambadi has lodged the F.I.R. against the unknow persons On 26.03.2026, the complainant Sunil Lambadi received a phone call from Vikas Kavati, informing him that he and Santosh Kavati were being assaulted by persons from Village Vangapalli. Upon receiving the information, the complainant, along with his brother Nitesh Lambadi and others, immediately reached the spot, where they allegedly found 20-25 persons assaulting Vikas Kavati and Santosh Kavati with sticks, fists, and kicks. When they attempted to intervene, they were also assaulted. Thereafter, Ajay Matti and Manoj intervened, and both injured persons were shifted to Madded Hospital for medical treatment. Police have arrested the co accused persons and on the basis of their memorandum statements arrested the present applicants and filed the charge sheet. 3 3. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that no incriminating article has been seized from the possession of the applicants and the alleged seizure of sticks has been made from the co-accused persons. It is also submitted that the names of the applicants do not find mention in the FIR and they have been implicated subsequently on the basis of the statements of the alleged eyewitnesses. Learned Counsel further submits that, as per the medical report, the victim has not sustained any serious or life- threatening injury and there is no injury which is likely to cause death. It is also submitted that the applicants have not acted in the manner alleged by the prosecution and have been in judicial custody for a considerable period. Most importantly, learned Counsel submits that the matter has already been amicably settled between the parties and, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicants in further custody. The applicants are permanent residents of the address mentioned in the cause title, are not likely to abscond, and are ready to furnish adequate surety and abide by all the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court. On these grounds, learned Counsel prays that the applicants may kindly be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non- applicant opposes the bail application and submits that the charge- sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 4 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicants, the fact that they have no criminal antecedents, and further considering that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, that applicants No. 1 to 4 have been in jail since 27.03.2026, applicants No. 5 to 10 have been in jail since 04.04.2026, and the applicant No.11 has been in jail since 03.06.2026, and also considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicants. 7. Let the Applicants - Manoj Kumar Gilgichcha, Manoj Dubba, Rahul Dubba, Bichmaiya Dubba, Matti Hemant, Dilip Paldev, Gilgichcha Ramchandra, Amit Dubba, Dubba Ganpat, Ravi Yalam & Rahul Matti involved in Crime No. 09/2026 registered at Police Station - Madded District - Bijapur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 109 & 117(2) of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court 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 misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and 5 the applicants fail 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. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav