1 2026:CGHC:1209 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 55 of 2026 Satyaprakash Kurre S/o Late Jagdish Kurre Aged About 25 Years Occupation - Labour Resident Of Village- Hariganwa Police Station Raghunathnagar, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer- Police Station, Gandhinagar, District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant(s) : Ms. Seema Verma, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Verma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 08/01/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed 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. 522/2025 registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable 2 under Sections 331(6), 140(2), 324(4) r/w Section 3(5) of BNS. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 07.09.2025 at about 9:00 PM, the present applicant along with other co-accused persons knocked at the door of the complainant and thereafter entered the complainant’s house through the roof. On account of a loan dispute, the accused persons allegedly abducted the complainant, assaulted him with fists and blows, and damaged his mobile phone. It is further alleged that the accused persons took the complainant to Mahamaya Mandir mount with an intention to kill him, but upon learning that the police were searching for them, the accused persons fled from the spot, leaving the complainant behind. Hence, the bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. She further submits that the identically situated co-accused, namely, Mohd. Sameer Alam has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025 in MCRC No.8641 of 2025. The applicant is in jail since 22.11.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she 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 filed in the present case. He further submits that the allegation against 3 the applicant is that he, along with co-accused persons, forcibly entered the complainant’s house, abducted and assaulted the complainant over a loan dispute, damaged his mobile phone, and took him to Mahamaya Mandir mount with the intention to kill, before fleeing on learning about police action. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of bail. 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 offence, period of detention of the applicant since 22.11.2025, the fact that though the applicant allegedly along with co-accused persons, forcibly entered the complainant’s house, abducted and assaulted the complainant over a loan dispute, damaged his mobile phone, and took him to Mahamaya Mandir mount with the intention to kill, before fleeing on learning about police action, but considering the fact that the identically situated co-accused, namely, Mohd. Sameer Alam has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025 in MCRC No.8641 of 2025, further the applicant has no criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the application is allowed. 8. Let the Applicant-Satyaprakash Kurre, involved in Crime No. 4 522/2025 registered at Police Station Gandhinagar, District- Surguja (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 331(6), 140(2), 324(4) r/w Section 3(5) 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 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 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 5 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. 9. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil