1 CGHC010308732026 2026:CGHC:38182 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7295 of 2026 Rajeshwar Netam Alias Gopi S/o Shri Vinod Singh Aged About 19 Years R/o A H P Colony, Urla District Raipur Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station, Urla District, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 25.08.2026 1. This is the .rst bail application .led 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. 82/2026 registered at Police Station- Urla, District, Raipur, (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Sections 109(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. 2. As per the prosecution story, in brief, it is alleged that on 08.03.2026 at about 5:00 A.M., the complainant, namely Sanat Kumar Yadu, was returning home on his bicycle after completing RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 his work and, at about 5:30 A.M., when he reached near C.G. Dharmakanta, Urla, two unknown persons riding on a black scooter attacked him from behind, as a result of which he fell down and sustained bleeding injuries on his back. After receiving primary treatment, he was admitted to AIIMS, Raipur. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant, an FIR was registered against unknown persons. During the course of investigation, the police, while making e;orts to identify the assailants, apprehended the applicant/accused Rajeshwar @ Gopi Netam and one juvenile in conCict with law and recorded their memorandum statements, wherein they allegedly admitted their involvement in the aforesaid incident. Pursuant to the memorandum statement of the applicant, the knife allegedly used in the commission of the o;ence was recovered and seized from his possession. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations levelled against the applicant are false and fabricated and that the applicant has neither committed nor participated in the alleged act constituting the o;ences in question. It is also submitted that, as per the memorandum statement, the knife allegedly used in the incident was attributed to the other co-accused, who is a juvenile, and the memorandum statement itself indicates that the juvenile was the person who attacked the complainant. He further submits that the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons and, after the arrest of the applicant, no Test Identi.cation Parade (TIP) was conducted to establish his identity as one of the assailants. He also 3 submits that no MLC/report showing any speci.c injury attributable to the applicant has been placed on record. It is also submitted that the applicant is in jail since 09.03.2026, the applicant has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been .led before the competent Court and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application of the applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been .led before the competent Court. He further submits that the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and are supported by the material collected during investigation. He further submits that the applicant was identi.ed during the course of investigation and his memorandum statement led to the recovery of the knife allegedly used in the commission of the o;ence. It is also submitted that the complainant sustained injuries in the alleged assault and was required to undergo treatment at AIIMS, Raipur, including a CT Scan, which indicates the seriousness of the injuries sustained by him. Therefore, considering the nature and gravity of the o;ence and the material available against the applicant, he prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the 4 material available on record, and further the fact that though the allegation against the applicant is that he, along with a juvenile co- accused, was involved in assaulting the complainant with a knife, but also considering the fact that the FIR was initially lodged against unknown persons and no Test Identification Parade was conducted after the arrest of the applicant to establish his identification as one of the assailants and no MLC showing any specific injury attributable to the applicant has been placed on record, further the fact that the charge-sheet has already been .led, he has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 09.03.2026, and the conclusion of the trial will take some more 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 – Rajeshwar Netam Alias Gopi, involved in Crime No. 82/2026 registered at Police Station- Urla, District, Raipur, (C.G.) for the o;ence punishable under Sections 109(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, be released on bail on 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 .le an undertaking to the e;ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates .xed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be 5 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 .xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without suIcient 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 .xed 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 .xed 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 suIcient 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. OIce is directed to provide a certi.ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan