1 CGHC010367202026 2026:CGHC:42825 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8794 of 2026 1 - Sonu Dewangan @ Nilanchal Dewangan S/o Aadikant Dewangan, Aged About 18 Years R/o Ward No.-03, Thanapara, Police Station And Tahsil Bagbahra District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House Officer, Police Station Bagbahra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Ms. Himanjali Advocate For Non-applicant : Ms. Monika Thakur, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 01/10/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 74/2025, registered by the Bagbahra, District Mahasamund (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 109, 296, 191(1) of BNS. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 06.04.2026, a dispute arose between the complainant and accused Ganpat Nishad regarding payment of Rs.50/- for a cigarette at a chakhna shop 2 near the Government Liquor Shop, Bagbahra. During the altercation, Ganpat Nishad allegedly took out a sharp-edged weapon and attempted to assault the complainant, whereafter he was pacified and left the spot. Subsequently, Ganpat Nishad returned along with co-accused Akash Nishad, Arjun Goswami and others, armed with sharp-edged weapons, and allegedly assaulted the complainant. When Monesh Yadav intervened, the accused persons allegedly chased him and inflicted several blows with sharp-edged weapons, causing injuries to his abdomen, right arm and left shoulder, while the complainant also sustained injuries on his left cheek and below his throat. A case was registered against the present applicant and his companions for the aforesaid offence. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant has not caused injuries to the complainant party. It is further submitted that the allegations are false and baseless. It is also submitted that the investigation is complete and the applicants are in custody since 19.06.2026. Therefore, learned counsel prays that the applicant may kindly be enlarged on regular bail. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the allegations against the present applicant are serious in nature. It is submitted that the applicant, along with the co-accused persons, armed with sharp-edged 3 weapons, assaulted the complainant and injured Monesh Yadav, causing injuries on various parts of his body. It is further submitted that the weapon used in the commission of the offence has been seized and there are specific allegations against the present applicant. Therefore, learned State Counsel prays for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the fact that the present applicant, along with the other co-accused persons inflicted knife injuries on the abdomen, right arm and scapular region of the injured Monesh Yadav. As per the medical report, there was a fracture of the 12th rib of the injured. The knife used in the commission of the offence was seized from the co-accused. It appears that the applicant and the co-accused, in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted the complainant & injured with a knife, hands and fists. Considering the manner in which the offence was committed and the injuries sustained by the injured & complainant, I am not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is rejected. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Jyoti