1 CGHC010346752026 2026:CGHC:42289 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 9163 of 2026 1 - Badal Jangde S/o Saroj Jangde Aged About 19 Years R/o Village - Kevtara, Police Station- Pachpedi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Pachpedi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. --- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Chandrikaditya Pandey, Advocate For Non-applicant : Mr. Nitansh Jaiswal, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 29/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Second Bail Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Crime No.144/2026, registered at Police Station Pachpedi, Bilaspur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 296, 351(3), 115(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3) of BNS. 2. First Bail Application was dismissed on merits vide order dated 13.08.2026 in MCRC No. 6978 of 2026. 3. That, the case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant, namely Prabhakar Marshal, lodged a report at Police Station Pachpedi, District Bilaspur (C.G.), on 17.05.2026, alleging, inter alia, that on the said date, at about 12:30 p.m., he was proceeding to attend the Dashgatra programme of his elder mother. It is alleged that he, along with Nimesh Rai and Dileshwar Marshal, was inviting the ladies of the society to participate in the bathing ceremony in connection with the said programme. It is further alleged that when they reached near the petrol pump at Pachpedi, one 2 Badal Jangde came there on his motorcycle and dashed his motorcycle against them, due to which all three of them fell down and a scuffle ensued between the parties. It is alleged that Badal Jangde, in anger, started assaulting the complainant and his companions with a belt. Upon seeing the incident, his companions, namely Vicky Jangde and VikasMarshal, also arrived at the spot and allegedly started quarrelling with and threatening the complainant and his companions with dire consequences. It is further alleged that the accused persons used a club, wooden plank and iron rod in the assault. Thereafter, some other persons, along with Saroj Jangde, allegedly arrived at the spot and also joined the quarrel, threatened the complainant and his companions with dire consequences, and assaulted them with a sharp-edged weapon. Due to the alleged assault, the complainant sustained an injury on the back of his head, whereas Nimesh Rai, who was attempting to intervene, sustained injuries on his head, ear, lips and face and was admitted to CIMS Hospital, Bilaspur. It is further stated that the incident was witnessed by Trilochan Marshal, Jaimal Bhardwaj and other persons. On the basis of the aforesaid report lodged by the complainant, the police registered Crime No. 144/2026 at Police Station Pachpedi, District Bilaspur (C.G.), for the aforesaid offences. Consequently, a case was registered against the present applicant and co-accused persons Hence, the present bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail in MCRC Nos. 6134/2026, 6984/2026 and 7005/2026. He would contend that the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is in jail since 19.05.2026. He further submits that some of the witnesses have been examined and they have not supported the case of the prosecution. The applicant is ready to abide by all stringent terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court, and there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the evidence. Thus, the applicant may be enlarged on regular bail on the ground of parity. 5. On the other hand, learned State Counsel would oppose the bail application and submit that the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 13.08.2026. He further submits that the present applicant and other co-accused persons assaulted the injured by using belts, bricks and other articles, causing serious injuries. The 3 injured sustained a fracture of his parietal bone, which was dangerous to life. He would further submit that the injuries sustained by the injured have already been considered in the previous order; therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the injuries sustained by the injured were grievous in nature and dangerous to life, the fact that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected on 13.08.2026, and there being no change in circumstances, the applicant is not entitled to the benefit of parity merely because the bail applications of the co-accused persons were allowed, as they had assaulted the injured only with hands and fists. Thus, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the present bail application is rejected at the admission stage itself. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Jyoti