1 2026:CGHC:8107 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 1599 of 2026 Kunal Bareth S/o Dashrath Bareth Aged About 19 Years R/o Village- Naya Baradwar, Tahsil And Police Station- Sakti, District- Sakti, (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Station House O2cer, Police Station- Baradwar, District- Sakti, (C.G.) (As Per Charge Sheet) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.02.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’), for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 279/2025 registered at Police Station- Baradwar, District- Sakti, (C.G.) for the o@ence punishable under Sections 309(6), 143(3), 118(1), and 140(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief, is that on 07.11.2025 at about 9:45 PM, the complainant, namely Anil Kumar Namdev, was returning to RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 his house from Railway Station, Baradwar, when two unknown persons approached him and o@ered to drop him at his residence. The complainant accompanied them on a motorcycle; however, instead of taking him to his house, they took him to Village Paladi Khurd, where the accused persons assaulted him with hands and Bsts and robbed him of Rs.1,000/-, a laptop, and a mobile phone, and further transferred an amount of Rs.11,500/- from the complainant’s PhonePe account. It is further alleged that one of the accused persons also committed an unnatural act with the complainant. During the course of investigation, the present applicant was arrested and, thereafter, a charge-sheet has been Bled against him. Hence, this bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the FIR and has been made an accused merely on the basis of suspicion. According to the prosecution case itself, the co-accused persons had allegedly called the present applicant at the place of incident, and he had not taken the complainant with him; rather, he has been arrested only on the basis of a memorandum. It is also submitted that the allegation of committing an unnatural act is speciBcally against the other co-accused persons and no such allegation is levelled against the present applicant. Further, the test identiBcation parade was not conducted properly. He further submits that two mobile phones and Rs.3,000/- in cash are stated to have been recovered from the possession of the present applicant, while the 3 assault was allegedly committed by the co-accused, namely Satish Patel, and another co-accused is a juvenile. He also submits that the applicant is in jail since 09.11.2025, the charge-sheet has been submitted before the competent Court, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposed the bail application of the present applicant and submitted that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court. She also submits that the victim, who was returning from the railway station, was intercepted by the present applicant along with the co-accused persons, who took him to a secluded place and assaulted him, as a result of which he sustained multiple injuries, as reDected in the MLC report. It is further submitted that the victim was robbed of his mobile phone and Rs.3,000/- in cash, which have been recovered from the possession of the present applicant. Accordingly, considering the gravity of the o@ence and the speciBc role attributed to the applicant, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of regular bail 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegations, and the speciBc role attributed to the present applicant, this Court has also taken into account that the victim, while returning from the railway station, was intercepted by the applicant along with the co-accused persons, taken to a 4 secluded place, brutally assaulted causing multiple injuries as reDected in the MLC report, and robbed of his mobile phone and Rs.3,000/- in cash, which were subsequently recovered from the possession of the present applicant. In view of the seriousness of the o@ence, the manner of its commission, and the material collected during investigation, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a Bt case to enlarge the applicant on regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant – Kunal Bareth, involved in Crime No. 279/2025 registered at Police Station- Baradwar, District- Sakti, (C.G.) for the o@ence punishable under Sections 309(6), 143(3), 118(1), and 140(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is rejected. 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. O2ce is directed to send a certiBed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan