1 2026:CGHC:18943 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3661 of 2026 Bhola Sao @ Tarun S/o Shri Sunil Sao Aged About 29 Years R/o Shastri Nagar, Camp- 01, Chhawani, Police Station Chhawani, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Chowki Smriti Nagar, Police Station Supela, District – Durg (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, Panel Lawyer. For Objector : Mr. P.K. Goswami, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 24.04.2026 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. 385/2026, registered at Police Station – Supela, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 109 of BNS. 2. The case of the prosecution, is that the applicant and Rohit Yadav were operating a stall selling snacks and disposables near a liquor shop in front of wine shop Junwani. Their shop is situated near each other. In the evening of 11.03.2026 at about 6 PM, the conflict escalated between Rohit and applicant when Rohit urinated near the shop of the applicant. When the applicant objected to the act of the Riohit, both started fighting with each other. Although the complaint intervened (father of the Rohit) intervened, however, both started hurling filthy RAJSHEKHAR SONI Digitally signed by RAJSHEKHAR SONI 2 abuses to each for moving and closing their stall, and all of a sudden they started fighting with knife. In the said assault both have sustained injuries and Rohit sustained injuries in the left chest and abdomen. Subsequently, an FIR was lodged at Police Station concerned, and the applicant was arrested. 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 are 3 criminal antecedents of the applicant and all of them are ended in acquittal. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed in this case. It is further submitted that though the applicant is said to have assaulted the injured with knife and he has suffered grievous injuries on his person, but the marriage of the applicant is to be solemnized on 27.04.2026, hence, the applicant be enlarged on bail. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Objector submitted that the applicant is said to have assaulted the injured with knife on his chest and abdomen, and as per the MLC report, the injured has also suffered grievous injuries on his person, and therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that there are 3 criminal antecedents of the applicant and the charge-sheet has been filed in this case, but she also submits that it is the correct fact that the marriage of the applicant is being solemnized on 27th of April, 2026. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused all of the documents available on record. 3 7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that there are 3 criminal antecedents of the applicant and all of them are disposed of in acquittal, charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant, and the marriage of the applicant is to be solemnized on 27th April, 2026, and he is in jail since 12.03.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am inclined to allow this application. 8. Let applicant, Bhola Sao @ Tarun, involved in Crime No. 385/2026, registered at Police Station – Supela, District – Durg (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 109 of 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 shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 4 (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. 9. However, this Court hopes and trusts that the trial Court shall make earnest endeavour to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of passing of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 10. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. 11. Certified copy today. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rajshekhar