1 CGHC010286242026 2026:CGHC:38668 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6896 of 2026 1 - Karan Yadav S/o Suresh Ram Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Bhatikuda, Police Station- Hardi Bazar, District- Korba (C.G.) 2 - Shubham Yadav S/o Resham Lal Yadav Aged About 29 Years R/o Village- Bhatikuda, Police Station- Hardi Bazar, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station Police Station- Hardi Bazar, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Aashutosh Shukla, Advocate. For Non-Applicant : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01.09.2026 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 applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 63/2026 registered at Police Station - Hardibazar, District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2) & 3(5) of the BNS. VAIBHAV SINGH Digitally signed by VAIBHAV SINGH Date: 2026.09.01 16:07:02 +0530 2 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on the basis of a complaint lodged by Roshan Yadav against the present applicants and co- accused Milan Yadav, it is alleged that on 25.04.2026 at about 10:00 p.m., the marriage procession (Barat) of his elder brother Rakesh Yadav was proceeding towards Marriage Palace Garden at Village Bhatikuda, Police Station Hardibazar. The complainant, along with his friends namely Brijpal, Ashish, Khusro and Santosh Patel, was present in the said marriage procession and they had consumed liquor. It is alleged that near Krishna Chowk, Village Bhatikuda, a dispute arose between the complainant and co-accused Milan Yadav in a drunken state, during which they abused each other in filthy language and Milan Yadav allegedly assaulted the complainant with a wooden/bamboo stick. Consequently, the complainant sustained injuries and was admitted to the hospital on 26.04.2026, from where he was discharged on 27.04.2026. On the basis of the said complaint, the present applicants along with co-accused Milan Yadav were booked for the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. The alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 25.04.2026 at Village Bhatikuda, whereas the FIR was lodged on 02.05.2026, and no satisfactory explanation has been furnished by the prosecution for the delay in lodging the FIR. Further, the complainant Roshan Yadav, in his statement recorded by the police, has clearly stated that he knew only Milan Yadav, and the present applicants have neither been named in the FIR nor identified by the complainant. It is further 3 submitted that, as per the report of Govind Institute of Life Care, Bilaspur, the complainant was admitted on 26.04.2026 and discharged on 27.04.2026, and the CT Scan report does not reveal any abnormality of the basal cisterns and the internal capsule appears normal. Moreover, no FSL examination has been conducted by the prosecution and no blood stains were found on the alleged rod and bamboo stick, thereby creating serious doubt regarding the prosecution case and the involvement of the present applicants. The applicants are young persons aged about 25 years and are engineering students; they are in custody since 03.07.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, further detention of the applicants would serve no useful purpose, and therefore, the applicants may kindly be enlarged on regular bail on such terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicants and submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed he further submitted that the present applicants allegedly assaulted the injured, resulting in grievous injuries, therefore, the present applicants are not entitled to be granted regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal of the case diary, it is observed that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature and are stated to have been caused on a 4 non-vital part of the body. It is further noticed that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. The charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, and the applicants have been in judicial custody since 03.07.2026, this Court is of the considered view that the applicants have made out a fit case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the present case. 7. Let the Applicants - Karan Yadav & Shubham Yadav involved in Crime No. 63/2026 registered at Police Station - Hardibazar, District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2) & 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two local sureties each in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 5 of the trial court absence of the applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice vaibhav