1 CGHC010303592026 2026:CGHC:36304 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7525 of 2026 Kali Urf Kali Bai W/o Anjan Kumar Urf S.K. Malik Aged About 55 Years R/o Rajiv Nagar, Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) (Surname Of Applicant's Husband Is Wrongly Mentioned As S K Mali In First Page Of In Impugned Order) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) (Police Station Wrongly Mentioned As Khursipar In First Page Of Impugned Order) ...Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Priyanshu Singh, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 14.08.2026 1. This is the first 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. 100/2026 registered at Police Station - Vaishali Nagar District Durg VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.08.14 16:07:23 +0530 2 (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 296, 115(2), 351(3) of the BNS. 2. As per the prosecution case,on 04.03.2026, the complainant Nandan Kumar Saw lodged a report at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Durg, alleging that while he was present near Jaitkhambh, Rajiv Nagar, co-accused Aman and Manohar approached him, abused him, threatened him and a physical altercation took place. During the incident, co-accused Manohar allegedly assaulted the complainant on the back of his head with a brick. It is further alleged that the present applicant, Smt. Kali Bai, reached the spot, joined the co-accused, threatened the complainant and threw bricks towards the complainant and his companion Narayan. The complainant was thereafter medically examined and, considering the injury sustained on his head, the offence under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 was added. The applicant was arrested on 08.05.2026, and after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the competent Court on 01.06.2026 for offences punishable under Sections 109, 296, 115(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is a 55-year-old woman and a small-scale vegetable vendor and that she did not assault the complainant or cause any injury to him, the principal overt act of striking the complainant with a brick being attributed to co-accused Manohar. It is further submitted that the initial medical examination disclosed only simple injuries and the subsequent invocation of Section 109 of the 3 BNS is doubtful and is a matter to be tested during trial. Learned counsel further submits that the investigation has been completed and the charge-sheet was filed on 01.06.2026, while the applicant has been in judicial custody since 08.05.2026, and therefore her further custodial detention is not required. The applicant is a permanent resident, has roots in society, there is no likelihood of her absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence, and she is ready to abide by all conditions imposed by this Hon’ble Court. Therefore, it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedents; therefore, he is not entitled to be released on regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations and the material available on record, it is observed that the principal allegation of assaulting the complainant with a brick and causing injury is attributed to the co-accused Manohar, whereas the allegation against the present applicant is of having reached the spot, threatened the complainant and thrown bricks towards the complainant and his companion. The applicant is a 55-year-old woman and has been in judicial custody since 08.05.2026. The charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, this 4 Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant. 7. Let the Applicant – Kali Urf Kali Bai, involved in Crime No. 100/2026 registered at Police Station - Vaishali Nagar District Durg (C.G.), for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 296, 115(2), 351(3) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two local 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 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against his 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 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 5 and proceed against her in accordance with law. 8. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously within a period of Six months from the receipt of receipt of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 9. 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 Vaibhav