1 2026:CGHC:16894 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3328 of 2026 Satish Bharti @ Monu S/o Brijkishore Bharti Aged About 23 Years R/o Shastri Nagar, Near Kumar Kirana Stores, Bhilai, Durg P.S. Chavni, Bhilai Tehsil And District- Durg Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through SHO, Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Skhikhar Bakhtiyar, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 13.04.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 220/2025, registered at Police Station – Vaishali Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 61(2), 115(2), 191(3), 324 and 3(5) of the BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that on 14.07.2025 around 7:30 PM, the complainant namely Pritam Kaur was cooking at home when a boy named Badi informed her that some boys were beating her son Shubdeep Singh alias Bachda with a baseball bat, sticks, and rods behind BSP High School. She rushed there and found him critically injured, covered in blood, and semi-conscious. With local help, she RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 took him to Supela Government Hospital; doctors referred him to Durg Hospital, then to Mekahara Hospital in Raipur, where he remains admitted for treatment of severe injuries to his legs, mouth, and head. Badi later told her that Chhota Bhancha alias Rakesh, Keshav Bhurhu alias Raj, Mohit Kosle, and their associates had lured Shubdeep behind BSP School and attacked him with baseball bat, sticks, and rods due to an old grudge, with intent to murder him in a conspiracy. Hence, this application. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is also submitted that though the applicant along with the co-accused is said to have assaulted the injured, but the applicant is not named in the FIR, and the co-accused person has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2026 passed in MCRC No.866/2026. The applicant is in jail since 29.07.2025 and trial is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, but could not disputed the fact that the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court and case of the applicant is identical to that of the co-accused. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 3 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of allegation levelled against the applicant and the fact that there is no criminal antecedents registered against the present applicant, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, and though the applicant along with the co-accused is said to have assaulted the injured, but the applicant is not named in the FIR, and the co-accused person has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 27.01.2026 passed in MCRC No.866/2026, the applicant is in jail since 29.07.2025 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 7. 7. Let applicant, Satish Bharti @ Monu, involved in Crime No. 220/2025, registered at Police Station – Vaishali Nagar, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 61(2), 115(2), 191(3), 324 and 3(5) of the BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed 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 fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 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 fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court 4 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 fixed 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 sufficient 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar