1 2026:CGHC:18724 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2483 of 2026 Mohammad Mahfuj Ahmad S/o Yasin Shekh Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Ward No. 4, Near Madarsa, Shanti Nagar Rajnandgaon, P.S. City Kotwali Rajnandgaon, Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. City Kotwali, Distt. Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate. For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer. For Complainant : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 23.04.2026 1. This is the First bail application filed 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. 730/2025 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 26.11.2025 at about 11:05 PM, the alleged incident took place. The victim, namely Anup Yadav @ 2 Guddu Yadav, had gone to Manav Mandir Chowk, Rajnandgaon, to Laxmi Medical Store. While returning, he realized that he had forgotten to purchase a bone for his dog from the medical store, and therefore, he went back there. At that time, the victim was smoking a cigarette. It is alleged that at the same time, the present applicant/accused came there and demanded a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- from the victim. The victim replied that he could not arrange such a huge amount. Upon this, the applicant became angry, started abusing him, and assaulted him with a knife. The victim has given his statement before the Judicial Magistrate First Class on 24.12.2025. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that the reason assigned by the victim appears to be beyond imagination, inasmuch as it is alleged that all of a sudden, at about 11:05 PM, the applicant/accused came to the medical store and, without any prior reason or necessity, demanded a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-. Upon refusal, he allegedly assaulted the victim with a knife. The entire story appears to be concocted and fabricated by the victim. He also submits that the victim is stated to have sustained three injuries on his body. He also submits that the victim was admitted to the hospital on 27.11.2025 for treatment and was discharged on 03.12.2025 after recovery. Thus, he remained hospitalized only for 6–7 days, which indicates that the injuries were simple in nature, recoverable, and not dangerous to life. He further submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 27.11.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel, as well as the learned counsel appearing for the objector, oppose the bail application of the 3 present applicant and submit that the allegations against the applicant are that he demanded a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- from the victim. When the victim expressed his inability to arrange such a huge amount, the applicant became enraged, started abusing him, and assaulted him with a knife. The victim has given his statement before the Judicial Magistrate First Class on 24.12.2025, wherein he has specifically alleged that, due to the said assault, he suffered grievous injuries on his face, neck, and chest. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in the present case. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, and the material available on record, the allegations against the applicant are of a serious nature, involving the demand of a substantial amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- from the victim. Upon his failure to meet the demand, the applicant is alleged to have assaulted him with a knife. The statement of the victim, recorded before the Judicial Magistrate First Class on 24.12.2025, prima facie corroborates the prosecution case and reflects that the victim sustained grievous injuries on his face, neck, and chest. In view of the gravity of the offence, the manner in which it is alleged to have been committed, and the specific role attributed to the applicant, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for the grant of regular bail. 7. Accordingly, the first bail application of the applicant – Mohammad Mahfuj Ahmad, involved in Crime No. 730/2025 registered at Police Station – City Kotwali, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 109(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, is rejected. 4 8. Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously. 9. 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 Abhishek