1 CGHC010293832026 2026:CGHC:35763 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 1904 of 2026 1 - Vivek Verma S/o Shriram Verma Aged About 24 Years R/o Near Satyanarayan Temple, Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House O'cer Tikrapara, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Sachin Nidhi, Advocate For State : Mr. Rishi Raj Pithwa, Dy. G.A. For objector : Md. Shahid Raza, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 12/08/2026 1. This appeal is 0led under Section 14-A(2) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for grant of regular bail to the appellant as he is arrested in connection with Crime No. 720/2025 registered at police station Tikrapara, District-Raipur ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.08.13 18:10:48 +0530 2 (C.G.) for commission of o;ence punishable under Sections 333, 109, 3(5) and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(d) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.09.2025, complainant Ayush Thakur lodged a report alleging that on 13.09.2025 at about 10:30 p.m., the appellant Vivek Verma, along with co-accused Bhavesh Verma and a juvenile o;ender, forcibly entered his house, abused him in 0lthy language and assaulted his brother Abhijeet Thakur. It is further alleged that the appellant Vivek Verma and the juvenile o;ender caught hold of Abhijeet Thakur, while co-accused Bhavesh Verma assaulted him with a sharp-pointed object, causing injuries to his neck and other parts of the body, pursuant to which he was admitted to the hospital. On the basis of the said report, the aforesaid crime was registered against the accused persons. 3. This is the third appeal 0led by the appellant. The appellant has earlier also 0led criminal appeal for grant of regular bail in CRA No. 418 of 2026 which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 23.02.2026. Subsequently, the appellant again 3 0led criminal appeal for grant of bail in CRA No. 1104/2026 which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 29.04.2026. Henceforth, the present appeal is 0led. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the case and that no incriminating article has been seized from his possession, whereas the alleged knife was seized from co-accused Bhavesh Verma, who is stated to be the main accused. It is further submitted that the juvenile co-accused has already been granted bail. Learned counsel submits that the victim Abhijeet Thakur (PW-6), in his statement recorded before the trial Court, has not speci0cally attributed any knife blow to the appellant and that the complainant, the victim and other prosecution witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. It is also submitted that the appellant has no criminal antecedents and has been in custody since 14.09.2025. His 0rst bail appeal was rejected on 23.02.2026, whereafter the subsequent appeal was withdrawn. Out of 24 prosecution witnesses, 16 witnesses have already been examined and, therefore, the trial is likely to take considerable time to 4 conclude. On these grounds, learned counsel prays for grant of bail to the appellant. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the victim sustained a knife injury on his neck, which is a vital part of the body, and that the allegations against the accused are serious in nature. It is further submitted that, having regard to the gravity of the o;ence and the manner in which the victim was assaulted, the appellant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 6. Learned counsel Md. Shahid Raza, appearing for the objector, submits that the objector has no objection to the grant of bail to the appellant. 7. The victim appeared through video conferencing from the concerned DLSA on tomorrow and expressed no objection to the grant of bail to the appellant. 8. I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 9. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the fact that co-accused Bhavesh Verma is stated to be the main accused and that the alleged 5 knife has been seized from his possession, whereas no seizure has been made from the present appellant, as well as the statement of the victim recorded before the trial Court, the period of incarceration of the appellant since 14.09.2025, and the fact that 16 out of 24 prosecution witnesses have already been examined, this Court is of the considered view that the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 10. Accordingly, the present appeal 0led for grant of bail is allowed. 11. It is directed that the appellant shall be released on bail on his executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Trial Court for his appearance before the said Court as and when directed. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Arpan