1 CGHC010362172026 2026:CGHC:42578 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 8676 of 2026 1 - Mohammad Sohail Raza S/o Mohd. Haroon Aged About 30 Years R/o Station Para, Ward No. 10, Chikhli, Distt.- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sho, P.S. Kotwali Distt.- Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Pranav Tiwari, Advocate For Non-applicant /State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 30/09/2026 1. The applicant has preferred this Third Bail Application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 338/2025, registered at 2 Police Station Kotwali, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190 and 109 of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 04.07.2025, the father of the injured lodged a report alleging that his son Mahfuj Sheikh was assaulted near Pyarelal Chowk, Rajnandgaon, by the applicant and co-accused persons, who allegedly arrived on motorcycles, picked up a quarrel with the injured and assaulted him with a knife. On the basis of the said report, Crime No. 338/2025 was registered for the aforesaid offences against the applicant and other accused persons. 3. The first bail application preferred by the applicant bearing MCRC/549/2026 was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 15/01/2026 whereas the second bail application preferred by him bearing MCRC/6237/2026 was dismissed on merits vide order dated 14/07/2026 passed by this Court. 4. Mr. Pranav Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, would argue that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the crime in question. He would further submit there are six accused persons including the applicant and three co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail by the trial Court. He would also contend that co-accused Kaushlendra Sahu @ Kastu used knife and he has also been granted bail. It is further argued that victim has already been examined and he has not supported the case of 3 the prosecution. Lastly, he would contend that investigation has been completed, charge sheet has been filed and the applicant is in jail since 05/07/2025 and conclusion of trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant/State, would oppose the bail application and submit that the applicant has five previous criminal antecedents for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149 of IPC, two cases under Sections 294, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, Section 13 of the Gambling Act and Sections 151, 107, 116(3) of the IPC, thus, it appears that applicant is a habitual offender. She would further contend that the injuries inflicted by the applicant and other co-accused persons upon the victim were grievous in nature and were life threatening, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary as well as the material available on record. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly considering that there are five previous criminal antecedents of the applicant which shows that he is a habitual offender and also considering that applicant along with co-accused persons have inflicted knife injuries on the body of the victim and in MLC, the medical officer has found three stab wounds over the buttocks of the victim and the said injuries sustained by the victim 4 are said to be grievous and life threatening and lastly considering that the allegations against the co-accused persons who have been granted bail are distinguishable with the allegations made against the present applicant as the victim has categorically stated in his statement under Section 183 of BNSS that the present applicant assaulted him with knife and the name of the applicant has also been mentioned in the FIR and based on the memorandum statement of the applicant, a knife has also been recovered, as such, the case of the co-accused persons who have been granted bail is not at all similar to the case of the present case on account of the evidence available against the present applicant. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 8. Accordingly, this third bail application filed by the applicant – Mohammad Sohail Raza for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 338/2025, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190 and 109 of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Harneet