1 2026:CGHC:8146 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 962 of 2026 Bharat Chaturvedi S/o Late Lakhan Chaturvedi, aged about 39 years, R/o Satnamipara Behind Jai Shri Poultry Farm Ps- Telibandha, Raipur District- Raipur, (C.G.) ... Applicant Versus The State of Chhattisgarh P.S. New Rajendra Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Shivam Agrawal, Advocate. For State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, P.L. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 13/02/2026 1. This is the Second bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 18 of 2025 registered at Police Station, Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351 (2) and 109 of the BNS (Corresponding Section 294, 506(B), 307 of the IPC). 2. Earlier bail application of the applicant was rejected by this court on merit vide order dated 25.06.2025 passed in MCRC No. 4861 of 2025. Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 27.01.2025, F.I.R. was lodged by one Murli Tandi against the present applicant-Bharat Chaturvedi alleging that the complainant namely, Murli Tandi, Ajay Bagh and Rajdeep @ Chintu, are the residents of the same locality. On the date of incident, they had gone with the present applicant to a newly constructed House No. B-02 for water proofing work. It is further alleged that at about 3:30 pm, the applicant enraged on Murli Tandi and Ajay Bagh over some issue and started hurling abusive language at him, hit Murli Tandi by shovel and pushed Ajay Bagh from the second floor of the said building, as a result of which, Ajay Bagh fell down and thereafter he was immediately taken to Mekahara Hospital, Raipur for medical treatment. Based on these allegations, the F.I.R. was registered and the applicant was arrested on 28.01.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to subsisting rivalry and dispute relating to labour payment. The prosecution story is fabricated and based upon false and baseless allegations. He further submits that the applicant is in judicial custody since 28.01.2025. His first bail application was dismissed with a direction to the learned Trial Court to conclude the trial expeditiously. However, despite charges being framed on 01.07.2025, only 6 out of 15 prosecution witnesses have been examined till date. Thus, there is substantial delay in conclusion of trial, constituting a change in circumstances warranting 3 consideration of this second bail application. The applicant is suffering from cancer of the mouth and neck and is undergoing active treatment. His medical condition is critical and requires specialized treatment at a higher medical centre under proper care and supervision of his family members. Continued incarceration poses a serious threat to his life and violates his fundamental right to life and health under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Relevant medical documents have already been placed on record. In view of the deteriorating medical condition, delay in trial, nature of injuries, and overall facts and circumstances of the case, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in continued custody. Therefore, the bail application filed by the applicant may be allowed. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that in compliance of the Court’s order dated 29/01/2026, the learned State counsel is directed to verify the said medical ailment of the applicant, which is duly verified and as per Medical Report of concerned Medical Officer, there are no symptoms of cancer has been found. Hence, the ground of illness does not justify grant of second bail. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. From perusal of the records, it transpires that this is the second bail application of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 25.06.2025 4 in MCRC No. 4861 of 2025 on the ground that on 27.01.2025 the present applicant accompanied the complainant Murli Tandi, along with Ajay Bagh and Rajdeep @ Chintu, to a newly constructed house bearing No. B-02 for carrying out waterproofing work, during the course of the work, at about 3:30 PM, the applicant allegedly became enraged over a certain issue and started abusing Murli Tandi and Ajay Bagh in filthy language and in the heat of anger, the applicant assaulted Murli Tandi by striking him with a shovel, thereafter, he allegedly pushed Ajay Bagh from the second floor of the building, causing him to fall down from a considerable height and due to the fall, Ajay Bagh sustained grievous injuries i.e. fracture of proximal femur at the right hip and was immediately taken to Mekahara Hospital, Raipur for medical treatment and the new ground of ailment urged on behalf of the applicant is that the applicant is severely suffering from cancer of the mouth and neck. However, upon due verification of the said claim by the concerned Medical Officer there appears to be no symptoms indicative of cancer have been found. As such, this Court does not find any sufficient or cogent ground to entertain the present second bail application of the applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-Bharat Chaturvedi, involved in Crime No. 18 of 2025 registered at Police Station, Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351 (2) and 109 of the BNS (Corresponding Section 294, 506(B), 307 of the IPC), is rejected. 5 9. The Director General of Police, Raipur (C.G.) is directed to ensure that all the Police personnel who are prosecution witnesses in the charge-sheet shall appear before the trial Court on the next date fixed by the trial Court and the Director General of Health, Raipur (C.G.) is directed to ensure that all the doctors who are prosecution witnesses in the charge-sheet shall appear before the trial Court on the next date fixed by the trial Court. 10. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible within a period of four months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order in accordance with law, if there is no legal impediment. 11. Registrar (Judicial) as well as the State counsel are directed to communicate this order to the Director General of Police, Raipur (C.G.) and Director General of Health, Raipur (C.G.) for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE U.K. Raju