1 CGHC010321902026 2026:CGHC:37828 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7678 of 2026 1 - Kamlesh Anant S/o Ugrasen Anant Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Bhalesur, P.S. Suhela, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Ramesh Anant S/o Ugrasen Anant Aged About 31 Years R/o Village Bhalesur, P.S. Suhela, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Dageshwar Anant S/o Ugrasen Anant Aged About 29 Years R/o Village Bhalesur, P.S. Suhela, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House O.cer, Police Station Suhela, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma. Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.08.2026 1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 98/2026 registered at Police Station - Suhela, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, (C.G.) for the o>ence punishable under Sections 351(3), 324(2), 296, 191(2), 191(3), RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 190, 115(2), 109(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, is that on 05.06.2026, the complainant, namely, Karan Kumar Gendre, lodged an FIR alleging that on 04.06.2026, at about 06:00 p.m., an altercation took place between him and Ramesh Anant near the house of Baiga. Thereafter, at about 07:15 p.m., another altercation took place between Gita Anant, mother of Ramesh Anant, and the complainant’s mother, and when the complainant intervened, Kamlesh Anant allegedly abused and assaulted him. It is further alleged that at about 12:30 a.m. (midnight), the present applicants, along with other co-accused persons, came to the house of the complainant and, when the complainant’s father, namely, Khilawan Das Gendre, opened the door, they allegedly assaulted him with wooden sticks (lathis) and an axe (tangiya), causing injuries to his head, neck and left hand. It is also alleged that when Haridas Gendre and Karan Gendre intervened, they were also assaulted, and the window of the car bearing registration No. CG-13-J-2222, belonging to Birjhu Gendre, was damaged. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, an FIR was registered against the present applicants and other accused persons at Police Station Suhela, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.). Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicants neither committed nor participated in any act constituting the o>ences alleged against them. He further 3 submits that, as per the medical documents issued by MRM Multispeciality Hospital, Kharora, injured Khilawan Das Gendre was conscious and stable at the time of admission and himself signed the consent form, with his vital parameters and blood pressure being within normal limits. It is further submitted that the applicants are alleged to have assaulted the injured with lathis/wooden sticks, whereas the allegation regarding the use of the tangiya (axe) and the assault causing the injury to the head/neck is speciEcally attributed to co-accused Suryapratap. Thus, no speciEc allegation of assault with the tangiya has been attributed to the present applicants. He also submits that the applicants and the complainant party are closely related and reside in the same village, and that a minor dispute between family members has been exaggerated due to local rivalry and previous animosity. It is further submitted that the FIR contains general and omnibus allegations and does not attribute any speciEc fatal overt act to each of the present applicants. The incident is alleged to have occurred in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and there was no premeditation or intention to cause death, and the essential ingredient of an intention to kill, necessary for the o>ence under Section 109(1) of the BNS, is not prima facie made out against the applicants. He further submits that the investigation is complete and the charge-sheet, being Charge-Sheet No. 85/2026 dated 07.07.2026, has already been Eled before the competent Court, hence, custodial interrogation of the applicants is no longer required. It is also submitted that the injured was discharged from MRM Multispeciality Hospital within 4 Eve days, i.e., on 10.06.2026, after admission on 05.06.2026, which, according to the applicants, does not support the allegation that the injuries were dangerous to life. He further submits that there is an unexplained delay of about 14 hours in lodging the FIR, which casts doubt upon the prosecution version and indicates deliberation and exaggeration in implicating the entire family. The applicants have no criminal antecedents, are permanent residents having deep roots in society, and there is no likelihood of their absconding or repeating the alleged o>ence. It is further submitted that the applicants are in jail since 06.06.2026, the charge-sheet has already been Eled, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays that the applicants be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. He further submits that the allegations against the present applicants are serious in nature and are duly supported by the medical evidence available on record. It is submitted that the injured Khilawan Das Gendre sustained multiple injuries in the incident, including injuries over the head and shoulder region, and the MLC records injuries over the parietal region of the head, besides other injuries caused by a hard and blunt object. It is further submitted that the medical examination and subsequent medical documents disclose a fracture, particularly involving the parietal bone, which clearly demonstrates that the injuries sustained by the injured were not merely superEcial or trivial in nature. 5 Learned State counsel further submits that the applicants are alleged to have assaulted the injured with lathis/wooden sticks, while the assault with the tangiya (axe) has been attributed to co- accused Suryapratap, and therefore the role of the present applicants cannot be brushed aside merely on the ground that the tangiya was not allegedly used by them. The fact that the injured was conscious or stable at the time of admission, or that he was subsequently discharged from the hospital, does not by itself negate the seriousness of the injuries, particularly when the medical record indicates a fracture. It is further submitted that the allegations in the FIR, the medical evidence and the material collected during investigation, prima facie disclose the involvement of the present applicants in the commission of the alleged o>ence. Therefore, he submits that considering the gravity of the o>ence, the manner of assault, the multiple injuries sustained by the injured, including the fracture of the parietal bone, and the prima facie material available against the applicants, no case for grant of bail is made out and the bail application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations and the material available on record, and further the fact that the present applicants are alleged to have assaulted the injured Khilawan Das Gendre with lathis/wooden sticks, while the assault with the tangiya has been attributed to co- accused Suryapratap. The injured sustained multiple injuries over 6 the head, neck, shoulder and left hand, and the MLC and subsequent medical documents prima facie disclose a fracture involving the parietal bone, indicating grievous injuries. The medical evidence, therefore, prima facie corroborates the prosecution case and demonstrates the seriousness of the assault. The plea of sudden quarrel between the parties is a matter to be appreciated during trial. Considering the gravity of the allegations, the manner of assault, the grievous injuries sustained by the injured and the prima facie material available against the applicants, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a Et case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicants – Kamlesh Anant, Ramesh Anant and Dageshwar Anant, involved in Crime No. 98/2026 registered at Police Station - Suhela, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, (C.G.) for the o>ence punishable under Sections 351(3), 324(2), 296, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 109(1) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. O.ce is directed to send a certiEed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul dewangan