1 CGHC010338492026 2026:CGHC:38826 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8119 of 2026 Javed Khan S/o Jakir Khan Aged About 31 Years R/o Dhobi Talab Ke Pass, Samta Colony, Thana Azad Chowk, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through - P.S. Tikrapara, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Aniket Pandey, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 02.09.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 592/2026, registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 299 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant, namely Kanhaiyya Yadav, lodged a report against the applicant alleging that the applicant publicly abused him and his family and also made KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 objectionable remarks against his deity, Lord Krishna, Mother Cow and the organization, thereby allegedly hurting his religious sentiments as well as the sentiments of the Hindu community. On the basis of the said report, Crime No. 592/2026 was registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur, for the offence punishable under Section 299 of the BNS. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant has been in custody since 04.07.2026 and the investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He submits that the applicant has neither sent any objectionable religious material or photographs nor used any objectionable words against any religion through Instagram. He further submits that the applicant has two criminal antecedents, out of which one case has already been disposed of and one case is pending, as the same have been explained in the bail application in Part-D relating to criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion and therefore, the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel, appearing for the State/non-applicant, opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant has two 3 criminal antecedents, which have already been explained in the bail application in Part-D relating to criminal antecedents. However, considering the nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the applicant, he submits that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence levelled against the applicant, the period of detention of the applicant since 04.07.2026 and the fact that, in the present case, charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and further considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant as explained in the bail application and also considering that the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, thus without further commenting anything on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant regular bail to the present applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let applicant, Javed Khan, involved in Crime No. 592/2026, registered at Police Station Tikrapara, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 299 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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:- 4 (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 deliberate or without sufficient cause, 5 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. However, this Court hopes and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, within a period of six months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. 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 Kunal