1 2026:CGHC:4745 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 924 of 2026 Lekh Ram Kurre S/o Ishwar Lal Kurre Aged About 40 Years R/o Near Mangla Bazar, Dhumardiha, Utai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Utai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Advocate For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Saumya Rai, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 28.01.2026 1. This is the First bail application 6led 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. 395/2025 registered at Police Station : Utai, District Durg, (C.G.) for the o<ence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 30.09.2025 the complainant Devendra Kumar Yadav had gone to distribute Prasad at the Durga Pandal situated at Indira Nagar Chowk. At about 08:30 p.m., when he went to the roof of an adjacent building to use the bathroom, the RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 present applicant allegedly arrived there carrying a shovel and, due to previous enmity, abused the complainant and assaulted him on the head with the said shovel with an intention to kill, thereby causing serious injuries. It is further alleged that when the complainant attempted to come down from the roof, the Applicant caught hold of him from behind and attempted to throw him o<, upon which the complainant managed to run downstairs to save his life. On the basis of the report lodged by the complainant, FIR No. 395/2025 dated 30.09.2025 was registered at Police Station Utai for o<ences under Sections 296, 351(3) and 109 of the Indian Penal Code, and investigation was set into motion. During the course of investigation, the applicant was arrested on 01.10.2025 and, upon completion of investigation, Charge-sheet No. 475/2025 dated 28.12.2025 was 6led before the competent Court. The 6rst bail application of the Applicant, being B.A. No. 1448/2025, was rejected by the learned Court vide order dated 16.10.2025 considering the seriousness of the allegations, and thereafter the second bail application was also rejected vide order dated 05.01.2026. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the prosecution case itself shows that the alleged incident arose out of prior personal rivalry and there is no allegation or material suggesting any pre-planned or premeditated act so as to attract the ingredients of Section 109 of the BNS, as the essential element of intention to cause death is 3 conspicuously absent. It is further submitted that the medical opinion, which merely opines the injury to be grievous on the basis of a cut wound on the occipital region, is not supported by any radiological examination such as X-ray, CT scan or MRI, and no fracture, internal injury or life-threatening complication has been reported; rather, the complainant was discharged within three days, which belies the allegation of homicidal intent. It is also contended that there is no independent eyewitness to corroborate the prosecution version and the entire case rests solely on the interested testimony of the complainant, making the allegations doubtful and exaggerated, particularly the allegation of an attempt to throw the complainant o< the roof, which 6nds no support from physical evidence or surrounding circumstances. It is further submitted that the investigation is complete and Charge-sheet No. 475/2025 dated 28.12.2025 has already been 6led, and therefore no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required. The applicant has no criminal antecedents, he is in jail since 01.10..2025, and the conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the present applicant. 4. On the other hand learned State counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicant and submits that the charge- sheet has been submitted before the competent Court in the present case. He further submits that the allegations against the applicant are grave and serious in nature, involving a brutal assault with a deadly weapon on a vital part of the body and an attempt to throw the complainant from the roof, which clearly attracts the 4 ingredients of serious o<ences. It is contended that the FIR, medical evidence and charge-sheet on record prima facie support the prosecution case and establish the active involvement of the applicant in the commission of the o<ence. He further submits that the applicant has already been denied bail twice by the competent Court after considering the seriousness of the allegations, and no new or changed circumstance has been shown to warrant reconsideration. Considering the nature of the o<ence, the manner of assault, and the possibility of the applicant inDuencing witnesses, he is not entitled for grant of regular bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, and the material available on record, it is noted that though the complainant is alleged to have sustained a head injury, the medical record does not indicate any fracture, internal injury or life- threatening complication, and the complainant was discharged from the hospital within a short period. The incident appears to have arisen out of prior enmity and there is no material on record to prima facie establish a premeditated intention to cause death. Further considering the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present case before the competent Court and the present applicant is in jail since 01.10.2025 and the trial is likely to take sometime for its conclusion, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 5 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let applicant, Lekh Ram Kurre, involved in Crime No. 395/2025 registered at Police Station : Utai, District Durg, (C.G.) for the o<ence punishable under Sections 296, 351(3) and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 6le an undertaking to the e<ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 6xed 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 6xed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without suEcient 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 6xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the 6 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates 6xed 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 suEcient 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. OEce is directed to send a certi6ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan