1 2026:CGHC:20522 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2973 of 2026 Rahul Murti S/o Shyam Murti Aged About 29 Years R/o House No 3/177/a, Balco Nagar Korba Tahsil And District- Korba (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Police Station Balco Nagar, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Non-applicant(s) For Applicant : Mr. Mirza Kaisher Beg, Advocate. For Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 01/05/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of BNSS for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 684/2025 registered at Police Station Balco Nagar, District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 309(4), 310(2), 3(5) of BNS. 2. As per the prosecution story, the complainant, Samir Khan, lodged a report on 23.10.2025 at Police Station Civil Line, Rampur, District Korba (C.G.), stating that on the same day at about 06:00 p.m., his father, along with his friends Dinesh Chouhan and Rohandas, was KUNAL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by KUNAL DEWANGAN 2 going to Lalghat. When they reached near the liquor shop at Lalghat, some unknown persons came there, used obscene language referring to his mother and sister and assaulted his father with slaps and kicks. Thereafter, they allegedly looted cash amounting to Rs. 20,000/- and an Infinix mobile phone which was kept in his pocket. On the basis of the said report, the Police Station registered Crime No. 684/2025 against unknown persons and during the course of investigation, arrested the present applicant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the allegations levelled against him are wholly false and baseless. It is further submitted that the FIR was initially lodged against unknown persons and the applicant has been arrested merely on the basis of suspicion. It is also submitted that in the present case the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court and so far as the criminal antecedents of the applicant are concerned, though seven cases have been shown, three cases have already been duly explained in paragraph 4(A) of the bail application and the remaining cases have been explained by way of an application for taking documents on record, out of which only one case is pending and the rest have been disposed of, either by way of compromise (rajinama) or acquittal. It is further submitted that the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, the applicant prays for grant of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned Panel Lawyer for the State opposes the bail application and submits that there is a recovery of Rs. 2,200/- 3 from the present applicant, which connects him with the alleged offence. It is further submitted that considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant, as reflected in the record and duly explained in the bail application itself, one criminal case is still pending against him, which shows his involvement in criminal activities, therefore, looking to the nature and gravity of the offence and the material available on record, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicant since 08.11.2025 and the fact that in the present case, charge- sheet has been filed before the competent Court and also considering the criminal antecedents of the applicant, as reflected in the record and duly explained in the bail application itself, one criminal case is still pending against him and further recovery from him, the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore without further commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. 8. Let the applicant – Rahul Murti, involved in Crime No. 684/2025 registered at Police Station Balco Nagar, District- Korba (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 309(4), 310(2), 3(5) of BNS, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, in the like sum to the 4 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. (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 5 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. Office is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the trial Court for necessary information and compliance.diurt fo forthwith. - S/- Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Kunal