1 2026:CGHC:19963 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3873 of 2026 1. Rehan @ Araslan S/o Abdul Saleem Aged About 18 Years R/o Rajbandha Talab, Moudhapara, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. Abdul Saleem S/o Abdul Habib Khan Aged About 48 Years R/o Rajbandha Talab, Moudhapara, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Applicants versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station- Moudhapara, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Non-applicant For Applicants : Ms. Aditi Singhvi, Advocate. Non-applicant/State : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 29.04.2026 1. The applicants has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 34/2026, registered at Police Station Moudhapara, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 109, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. As per the case of the prosecution, the complainant, Mohd. Wasim Qureshi, filed a complaint before the police stating that on 20.02.2026, he went to the house of Salim Khan (applicant No. 02) to speak with his ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Date: 2026.04.30 18:42:41 +0530 2 younger brother, Junaid Khan. Thereafter, Salim Khan started a dispute with the complainant and asked him to leave the house. Subsequently, the accused persons, including the present applicants, began abusing the complainant, and applicant No. 01 allegedly stabbed him with a knife on his buttock. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present applicants are innocent persons who have been falsely implicated in this case. She further submits that the injuries sustained by the complainant are simple in nature. She further submits that the applicants have only one criminal antecedent each under the IPC from the year 2025, which is pending trial. She further submits that the applicants have been in jail since 21.02.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, he prays for the grant of regular bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of the present applicants and submits that the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. 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 and gravity of the offence, and the fact that the injury sustained by the injured person has been found to be simple in nature, moreover, the fact that the applicants have only 01 criminal antecedent under the IPC of the year 2025, which is pending trial, further, the charge sheet has already been submitted before the competent Court in the present case, and that the applicants have been in jail since 21.02.2026, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time, I am of the opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 3 7. Let the applicants – Rehan @ Araslan and Abdul Saleem, involved in Crime No. 34/2026, registered at Police Station Moudhapara, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 109, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicants 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 4 court absence of the applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. 8. 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