1 CGHC010316472026 2026:CGHC:36329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No.7539 of 2026 Deepak Sahu S/o Rajkumar Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No.02, Sasaholi, Tilda Nevra P.S. Tilda-Nevra, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Tilda-Nevra Raipur Gramin, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant _____________________________________________________ For Applicant :Mr. Vinod Kumar Dewangan, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State :Ms. Ankita Shukla, PL. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 14.08.2026 1. The Applicant has preferred this 1st Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Digitally signed by SISTLA NEELIMA VISHNU PRIYA Date: 2026.08.14 19:14:12 +0530 2 connection with Crime No.222/2026 registered at Police Station – Tilda-Nevra, Raipur Gramin, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 119(1), 324(4), 331(2), 190, 191(2) and 191(3) of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, complainant Durgesh Adil, Assistant Vice President of Sambhav Steel Tube Limited, Sarora, lodged a written report on 23.05.2026 at Police Station Tilda Newra, District Raipur, stating that after completing his duty at about 7:00 p.m. on 22.05.2026, he left for his residence at Raipur. At about 11:15 p.m., the company's security guard Murli Dhar Patle informed him telephonically that some persons had entered the canteen situated at Labour Colony, Phase No.1, damaged the canteen property and assaulted the canteen employees. On the following day, the complainant examined the CCTV footage installed in Phase No.1 Colony, in front of the canteen and near the main gate, wherein two persons were allegedly seen entering the canteen, vandalising the articles and assaulting the canteen employees, while a black-coloured car and two autos, along with some other persons, were seen outside. The injured employees, namely Laxman Singh and Prakash Ram, had sustained injuries on their respective legs, knees, thighs, heel and waist. They disclosed that two of the 3 persons involved in the incident had forcibly entered the canteen and while vandalising the articles, assaulted them with a rod, one of whom was identified as Lucky Sharma. The assailants allegedly demanded money from the canteen employees on a monthly basis for permitting them to run the canteen and further demanded money for consuming liquor. On refusal, they allegedly abused the employees in filthy language and threatened them with dire consequences.. Accordingly, the offence was registered, investigation was taken up and the Applicant was duly arrested. Hence this application. 3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case arising out of the same incident which has also resulted in registration of FIR No. 223/2026 and that registration of two separate FIRs in respect of the same incident is impermissible. It is further submitted that in FIR No. 223/2026, the complainant has filed a no-objection for grant of bail and this Court has already granted bail to the Applicant vide order dated 05.08.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 7093/2026, therefore, the Applicant seeks bail on the ground of parity. Lastly, it is submitted that the Applicant is in custody since 24.05.2026 and conclusion of trial is likely to take 4 considerable time, therefore, he may be granted bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the injured persons have sustained simple injuries and an amount of Rs.2,000/- has been seized from the Applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned Counsel for the parties, the material available in the case diary, the nature of allegations, the fact that the present case and FIR No.223/2026 arise out of the same incident, the fact that the Applicant has already been granted bail in FIR No.223/2026 vide order dated 05.08.2026 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 7093/2026, the injuries sustained by the injured persons are simple in nature, the period of custody of the Applicant since 24.05.2026 and the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion, without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to allow the application. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let Applicant- Deepak Sahu involved in Crime No.222/2026 registered at Police Station – Tilda-Nevra, Raipur Gramin, District Raipur (C.G.), for the offences under Sections 296, 5 115(2), 351(2), 119(1), 324(4), 331(2), 190, 191(2) and 191(3) of BNS 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/she 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/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her 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/her 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/her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of 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/her in accordance with law. 6 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 Priya