1 CGHC010350132026 2026:CGHC:43498 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8816 of 2026 1. Kesh Kumar S/o Chintaram Sahu Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Bhusadipali, Police Chowki Sonakhan P.S. Kasdol, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 2. Lokesh Sahu @ Chandu S/o Kesh Kumar Aged About 18 Years And 06 Month R/o Village Bhusadipali, Police Chowki Sonakhan P.S. Kasdol, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Applicants versus • State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Kasdol (Police Chowki Sonakhan) District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicants : Mr. Om Prakash Sahu, Advocate For State : Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Governmant Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 07.10 .2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 308/2026 registered at Police Station Kasdol(Police Chowki Sonakhan), District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 118(2) and 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, on 13.08.2026 at about 7:00 a.m., there SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.10.07 17:58:59 +0530 2 was a scuffle between the applicants and injured Lalita Prasad Sahu & Mukesh Sahu on account of a land dispute. It is alleged that applicant No. 1 inflicted injury on parietal region of Lalita Prasad Sahu by means of an iron rod, resulting in a laceration. It is also alleged that the present applicants assaulted Lalita Prasad Sahu and Mukesh Sahu using their hands and fists. An FIR was lodged on the same date, and consequently, offences as stated above were registered against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants would contend that the applicants have no criminal antecedents, charge-sheet has already been filed, applicants are in jail since 18.08.2026 and trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. It is also argued that injuries sustained by the injured were simple in nature, except injury inflicted on parietal region. He would pray to allow this application. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the application. He would submit that according to the MLC, the injuries sustained by Lalita Prasad Sahu are serious in nature; therefore, the instant application deserves to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the allegations levelled against the present applicants and fact that charge-sheet has already been filed, applicants are in jail since 18.08.2026, they have no criminal antecedents, and according to MLC, injuries sustained by the injured were not fatal to life, therefore, I am inclined to allow this application. 3 7. Accordingly, the regular bail application is allowed and it is directed that in the event of the applicants executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:- (i) they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; (ii) they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to fair and expeditious trial, & (iii) they shall appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to him by the said Court till disposal of the trial. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE $iddhant