1 2026:CGHC:19983 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2529 of 2026 1 - Gopi Patle S/o Heera Lal Patle Aged About 30 Years, 2 - Jaggu Patle S/o Heera Lal Patle Aged About 24 Years, Both R/o Village- Buchihardi, P.S.- Baloda, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Applicants versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S.- Balaoda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondent For Applicants : Shri Krishna Kumar Prajapati, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, PL. Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Order on Board 29/04/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No.56/2026 registered at Police Station Balaoda, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 119(1), 296, GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.04.30 18:37:43 +0530 2 351(3), 115(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 08/02/2026 the complainant Nilesh Kumar Suman lodged First Information Report on 08/02/2026 before the P.S.-Baloda, stating that he was getting work done in his new house and after giving leave to the labourers for having food, he was also going to his old house to have food, when he reached near Sadhelal's house, at the same time Gopi Patle and Jaggu Patle of the village both came and started demanding money from him for drinking liquor, he said that I do not have money, he was beaten up in the east of boundary of his field, abused his mother and sister. When he refused, started abusing him and threatened to kill him. When he refused the applicant no. 1 Gopi Patle beat him with his hands and applicant no. 2 Jaggu Patle started beating him with a stick, hearing the noise of the fight, during that period Vikesh Kumar Suman and Suraj Ratre came to spot and tried to save the complainant. Thereafter, the First Information Report lodged against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the complainant party was the aggressor and, to shield themselves, a false FIR has been lodged against the applicants. It is further submitted that no grievous injury has been sustained by the complainant. He would submit that the charge sheet has been filed in this case, the applicants are in jail since 09/02/2026 and conclusion of trial will take some time, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicants. 4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application 3 and she would submit that charge sheet has been filed in this case before the competent court. She would submit that applicant No.1 has four criminal antecedents and applicant No.2 has two criminal antecedents. She would submit that injury caused to the injured is simple in nature. 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, submission of learned counsel for the parties, materials available on record, nature of allegation levelled against the applicants, further the fact that injury caused to the injured is simple in nature, period of detention of the applicants since 09/02/2026, charge sheet has been filed and also considering the fact that trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion, therefore this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the Applicants- Gopi Patle & Jaggu Patle, involved in Crime No.56/2026 registered at Police Station Balaoda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 119(1), 296, 351(3), 115(2), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita., be released on bail on each of them 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 4 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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicants fails 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 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 for necessary information and compliance. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE gouri