1 CGHC010324032026 2026:CGHC:37381 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7721 of 2026 Shantilal Katakwar S/o Late Ramtan Katakwar Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Siladehi, Police Station Birra, District - Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station - Birra, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Mr. Aman Tamrakar, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L. HON'BLE MR. RAMESH SINHA, CHIEF JUSTICE ORDER ON BOARD 20.08.2026 1. This is the 1st 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. 47/2026 registered at Police Station – Birra, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.), for the offences under SAURABH YADAV Digitally signed by SAURABH YADAV Date: 2026.08.20 17:43:53 +0530 2 Sections 296, 115 (2), 351 (3), 109 (1), 331(6) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act. 2. That, as per the prosecution story, in brief, the complainant appeared at Birra Police Station on 08.04.2026 and lodged a report stating that on 07.04.2026, at about 09:00 p.m., after having dinner, all the family members went to sleep in their respective rooms and in the parchi. The complainant slept in a room with his father. On 08.04.2026, at about 03:00 a.m., upon hearing the screams of his sister, Sarojini Sahu, the complainant woke up. His father also got up and proceeded towards the parchi. The complainant likewise ran towards the parchi and found his sister, Sarojini Sahu, sleeping there along with his mother and elder sister. It is alleged that the accused, Shanti Lal Katakwar, attacked the complainant's father, Santosh Sahu, and his brother-in-law, Omprakash Sahu, near the parchi and the room, while abusing the complainant's mother and sister in filthy language and threatening to kill them with an intention to cause their death. It is further alleged that the complainant's father, Santosh Sahu, sustained injuries on his left shoulder, behind the shoulder and stomach by means of a sharp-pointed Binha. He was also seriously injured on the right side of his forehead with a sharp-edged Gandasha (Katta). His brother-in-law, 3 Omprakash Sahu, who attempted to intervene, was allegedly seriously injured by being struck on the head with an iron ploughshare of a tractor and by being assaulted with a Binha on his stomach, left side of the chest, left arm, shoulder and back. Upon witnessing the incident, the complainant, his sister Sarojini Sahu and his mother, Sukwara Bai, intervened and attempted to apprehend the accused. However, the accused managed to free himself and entered the room of his brother-in-law, Omprakash Sahu, and bolted the door from inside. It is further alleged that during the night, the accused climbed into the under-construction house of Dhaniram Sahu from the side of the house and reached the roof of the complainant's house. He allegedly cut the lock of the door with a saw blade and entered the house. Thereafter, he asked the complainant's sister, Sarojini Sahu, to elope with him. When she refused, he allegedly shouted, upon which the complainant's father and brother-in-law woke up after hearing the noise, and the accused assaulted them. The complainant informed the village Sarpanch, Bhuvan Lal Sahu, the Deputy Sarpanch, Dauram Sahu, and Mahettar Sahu about the incident over the telephone. Consequently, Sarpanch Bhuvan Lal Sahu informed Birra Police Station about the incident. Thereafter, the complainant's father and brother-in-law were 4 taken to the Community Health Centre (CHC), Bamhnidih, for treatment along with other family members. The complainant, accompanied by Chauleshvar Sahu, thereafter went to the police station and lodged the report. On the basis of the said report, a case was registered against the accused at Birra Police Station and the matter was taken up for investigation. A copy of the FIR dated 08.04.2026 is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure A/2. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was having an affair with the daughter of the complainant, and that the family members were not agreeable to the said relationship. It is further submitted that the applicant is alleged to have assaulted the complainant and the other injured persons, namely, the father and brother- in-law of the complainant, both of whom are stated to have sustained injuries caused by a pointed weapon. It is further submitted that, as per the MLC reports, the nature of the injuries has not been opined upon, and both the injured persons were discharged from the OPD. It is further submitted that the applicant has remained in custody for a considerable period and that the trial is likely to take 5 considerable time to conclude. There is also no likelihood of the applicant absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed. It is further submitted that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent, in which he was acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 509 of the IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. 5. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that the applicant is alleged to have assaulted the complainant and the injured persons, namely, the father and brother-in-law of the complainant, by means of sharp and pointed weapons. However, as per the MLC reports, the nature of the injuries has not been opined upon and the injured persons were discharged from the OPD. It is also not in dispute that the applicant is in custody for a considerable period and that the charge-sheet has not yet been filed. The applicant has one previous criminal antecedent, in which he has been acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 509 of the IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. Considering the overall facts 6 and circumstances of the case, the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time to conclude, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 6. Let Applicant- Shantilal Katakwar involved in Crime No. 47/2026 registered at Police Station – Birra, District- Janjgir- Champa (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 296, 115 (2), 351 (3), 109 (1), 331(6) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act 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 the Bharatiya 7 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. 7. This Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour 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. 8. 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 Saurabh