1 2026:CGHC:4404 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 866 of 2026 Pradeep Kashyap S/o Lt. Ram Anchal Kashyap Aged About 23 Years R/o Camp-1, Shastri Nagar, Ward No. 27 Bhilai Tehsil And District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O3cer Police Station Vaishali Nagar, Durg (C.G.) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Aman Pandey, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 27.01.2026 1. This is the 9rst bail application 9led under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 220/2025 registered at Police Station – Vaishali Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) o>ence under Sections 109, 61(2), 115(2), 191(3), 324 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the prosecution story, on 14.07.2025, when the complainant was cooking food, she was informed that a few persons had assaulted her son, Shubhdeep Singh, and that he was lying behind BSP High School. Upon reaching the spot, she found her son drenched in blood, and he ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.01.29 11:02:19 +0530 2 was thereafter taken to the hospital. After returning from the hospital, she again enquired about the incident from Badi, who then informed her that Chota Bhancha @ Rakesh, Kesh Bhuru @ Raj, Mohit Kosle, and other persons, armed with a baseball bat, wooden stick, and iron rods, had assaulted her son. After completion of the investigation, the police have already 9led the charge-sheet before the learned trial Court , and one wooden stick is alleged to have been seized from the present applicant. 3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the material collected by the prosecution does not ful9l the necessary ingredients required to make out the o>ence alleged against the present applicant. It is submitted that neither the MLC report nor the query report supports the case of the prosecution, and although injuries were sustained by the injured victim, they are not of such nature as to constitute an o>ence under Section 109 of the BNS. He also submits that the applicant was not named in the FIR and has been implicated solely on the basis of the memorandum of a co-accused person, which is not permissible under the law. He also submits that the other co-accused person namely, Hemant Kumar Thakur has already been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 9858 of 2025 vide order dated 03.12.2025. He submits that the applicant has been in jail since 29.07.2025, conclusion of the trial may take sometime, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that the charge sheet has been 9led in the present case before the competent Court. She further submitted that the applicant allegedly assaulted the injured with a hard and blunt object, as a result of which the injured sustained injuries, therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of 3 bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and from the perusal of the case diary as well as the medical report of the injured, it transpires that the injuries sustained by the injured person are on a non-vital part of the body. Moreover, the charge-sheet has been 9led before the competent Court and he is in jail since 29.07.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Let the Applicant – Pradeep Kashyap, involved in Crime No. 220/2025 registered at Police Station – Vaishali Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) o>ence under Sections 109, 61(2), 115(2), 191(3), 324 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 9le an undertaking to the e>ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 9xed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date 9xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su3cient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 4 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date 9xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates 9xed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without su3cient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. O3ce is directed to send a certi9ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. - Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Abhishek