1 2026:CGHC:17199 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3392 of 2026 Yogesh Yadav @ Lucky S/o Santosh Yadav Aged About 24 Years Resident Of Bhanpuri Shiv Vidya Nagar Bandhwa Pond Police Station Khamtarai District- Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station Amanaka Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 15.04.2026 1. This is the second bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 456/2024 registered at Police Station – Amanaka Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 309(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The earlier bail application of the applicant being MCRC No. 9606 of 2025 was rejected by this Court vide order dated 26.11.2025 on merits. RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 3. The prosecution story in brief, is that the complainant, Neeraj Rajput, lodged a report at Police Station Amanaka alleging that on 30.12.2024 at about 10:30 PM, some unknown persons stabbed the injured, Dhiraj Rajput, near Kaka Dhaba, Ring Road No. 2, Raipur, and also looted his mobile phone. On the basis of this report, an offence was registered against unknown persons, and during the course of investigation, the present applicant was arrested on 31.12.2024. Hence, this bail application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Hon’ble Court on merit. He further submits that at the time of incident there was simple dispute between the applicant and complainant and the applicant has neither assaulted the injured nor committed any aforesaid offences as alleged by the prosecution against him. He also submits that no weapon or knife has been recovered from the applicant, his name does not appear in the FIR, and as per the allegations, it was co-accused K. Jaswant Sai who allegedly stabbed the injured and the applicant is in jail since 31.12.2024. He further submits that as per the status of the trial, out of 14 prosecution witnesses, 03 have been examined before the trial Court and not support the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile. Hence, he prays for grant of second bail to the applicant. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the second bail application of the present applicant and submits that the injured sustained six injuries, five of which are stab wounds and one an 3 incised wound, with protrusion of the intestines, clearly indicating a serious assault. It is contended that the applicant, along with one of the co-accused, restrained the injured while the third accused, K. Jaswant Sai, inflicted the stab injuries.. Hence, it is contended that the applicant does not deserve any relief at this stage. 6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that the first bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court on merits though the applicant is languishing in jail since 31.12.2024 and as per the status of the trial, 03 prosecution witnesses have been examined in the case and not support the case of the prosecution and have turned hostile, but the applicant along with one of the co-accused caught hold of the injured while the third accused, K. Jaswant Sai, inflicted six serious injuries on the injured, including five stab wounds and one incised wound with protrusion of intestines, therefore, I am not inclined to grant second bail to the applicant. 8. 8. Accordingly, the second bail application of the applicant – Yogesh Yadav @ Lucky, involved in Crime No. 456/2024 registered at Police Station – Amanaka Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 309(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, is rejected. 4 9. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 10. 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 Rahul Dewangan