1 CGHC010317392026 2026:CGHC:36822 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7647 of 2026 Deepak Yadav S/o Mannu Yadav Aged About 22 Years R/o Ward No. 24, Naya Ravan Bhatha, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O+cer, Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gurudev I. Sharan, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 18.08.2026 1. This is the 2rst bail application 2led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 240/2026 registered at Police Station- Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the o:ence punishable under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the incident is alleged to have occurred on 03.05.2026 at about 10:30 hours, and the FIR was RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 lodged on the same day at about 15:19 hours. The complainant, namely, Omprakash Gaharwar, elder brother of the injured/victim Parmeshwar Gaharwar, informed the police that at about 11:00 A.M., he received information over a mobile phone call that two unknown persons had assaulted his brother with a knife near Kilkari Garden, Mahasamund, following which the injured was taken to District Hospital, Mahasamund, for treatment. Thereafter, the complainant reached the hospital, where the victim disclosed that at about 10:00–10:30 A.M., he was sitting with his sister Nilam Kandoi in front of Kilkari Garden, near Jama Masjid, when two unknown persons arrived on a motorcycle. It is alleged that while one of them remained near the motorcycle, the other approached the victim and demanded money from him. When the victim refused, the said person allegedly took out a knife from his pocket and threatened to kill him, pursuant to which the victim handed over Rs.200/- to him. However, the accused allegedly demanded Rs.500/- and, upon the victim’s refusal, threatened him with the knife and attempted to inBict a knife blow. The victim allegedly tried to protect himself with his left hand, as a result of which he sustained an injury to his left shoulder. On witnessing the incident, the victim’s sister raised an alarm, whereupon both the assailants allegedly Bed from the spot on their motorcycle. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present case was registered and the applicant has been implicated therein. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is 3 further submitted that the applicant has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Rounak Kumar and there is no independent or substantive material connecting the applicant with the alleged o:ence. He further submits that the applicant had neither participated in the commission of the alleged o:ence nor inBicted any knife injury upon the victim, and that the speci2c allegation of assault with a knife is not attributable to the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant has only one criminal antecedent pertaining to the year 2024, which has already been disposed of before the National Lok Adalat on 09.03.2024, and a copy of the order dated 09.03.2024 has been 2led along with the application as Annexure A-3. He further submits that co-accused Rounak Kumar, whose memorandum statement is relied upon for implicating the present applicant, has also 2led a bail application, which is presently listed for consideration in the last week of August, 2026. He further submits that the charge-sheet has been 2led before the competent Court, the applicant is in jail since 06.05.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, it is submitted that, considering the nature of the allegations, the absence of any speci2c overt act attributable to the applicant, the fact that the alleged knife injury was not inBicted by him, and the circumstances stated hereinabove, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant is 4 involved in the present o:ence on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Rounak Kumar and the allegations disclose his involvement in the incident in which the victim was threatened with a knife and sustained an injury. It is further submitted that the applicant has one previous criminal antecedent, which cannot be completely ignored while considering the prayer for bail. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations and the material available on record, it is prayed that the present bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that though the allegations against the applicant is that he had allegedly caught hold of the victim and assaulted him with hands and 2sts, but it is also to be noted that the applicant has been implicated in the present case primarily on the basis of the memorandum statement of co-accused Rounak Kumar and there is no speci2c allegation in the prosecution story that the applicant had used any weapon or inBicted any grievous injury upon the victim. Further the fact that the co-accused Rounak Kumar, on whose memorandum the applicant has allegedly been implicated, has also 2led a bail application, which is pending consideration and is listed for the last week of August, 2026. The applicant has one criminal antecedent pertaining to the year 2024, which has already been 5 disposed of before the National Lok Adalat on 09.03.2024, the applicant is in jail since 06.05.2026 and conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant - Deepak Yadav, involved in Crime No. 240/2026 registered at Police Station- Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, (C.G.) for the o:ence punishable under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a 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 2le an undertaking to the e:ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 2xed 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 2xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su+cient 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 6 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 2xed 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 2xed 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 su+cient 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. 8. O+ce is directed to provide a certi2ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan