1 2026:CGHC:20515 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 2972 of 2026 Sunil @ Banu Thakur S/o Baliram Thakur, Aged About 32 Years R/o Village- Ratapayli, P.S.- Dongargaon, Tahsil- Dongargaon,district Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) ... Applicant versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officers P.S. Dongargaon, Tahsil- Dongargaon, District- Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) ... Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ravi Kumar Bodhani, Advocate along with Mr. Ankush Soni, Advocate appears, through V.C. For Non-applicant : Ms. Ritika Verma, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 01.05.2026 1. The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail, as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 32/2026, registered at Police Station- Dongargaon, Tahsil- Dongargaon, District- ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Digitally signed by ARPAN SRIVASTAVA Date: 2026.05.04 17:57:15 +0530 2 Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 109, 3(5), 191 BNS 2023 and 25 Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 26.01.2026, during a village Mandi program at Rudgaon, the injured Gainduram Sonkar was allegedly assaulted near Nava Talab by the accused persons. It is alleged that following a verbal altercation, the accused persons, armed with knife and sticks, abused, threatened and attacked the victim with an intention to kill, causing multiple injuries on his head, forehead, back and chest. The injured was immediately taken to Medical College, Rajnandgaon for treatment, where he disclosed the names of the assailants. During investigation, weapons used in the offence were seized from the possession of the accused persons and other co-accused were identified and arrested. Sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 along with Section 25 of the Arms Act were invoked, and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet No. 19/2026 dated 02.03.2026 was filed before the competent Court. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated and his name is not mentioned in 3 the FIR, and he has been subsequently implicated on the basis of an affidavit dated 17.02.2026 allegedly given by the injured, which casts doubt on the prosecution case. It is further submitted that no weapon or incriminating material has been seized from the applicant and only general allegations have been made against him. The applicant was arrested on 14.02.2026 and is in custody since then, and the charge-sheet has already been filed, hence no further custodial interrogation is required. It is also contended that the injuries suffered by the injured are not grievous in nature and he is presently in normal condition, therefore, he may be enlarged of bail. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the applicant is involved in a serious offence of assault with deadly weapons. It is contended that the FIR was lodged by the father of the injured, who was not aware of the assailants at the relevant time, however, during investigation, the injured Gendu Ram Sonkar, who sustained multiple incised injuries including on the frontal chest region, has specifically named the applicant in his affidavit and attributed active participation in the assault. It is further submitted that merely 4 because the applicant was not named in the FIR or no weapon has been seized from him does not weaken the prosecution case at this stage. Therefore, considering the gravity of the offence and material available on record, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the serious nature of allegations involving assault with deadly weapons and the specific role attributed to the applicant, this Court is not inclined to grant bail. Although the applicant has not been named in the FIR, the same was lodged by the father of the injured who was not aware of the assailants, and during investigation, the injured has specifically named the applicant in his affidavit and attributed active participation in the offence. The injured has sustained multiple incised injuries, including on the frontal chest region, which prima facie indicates the gravity of the assault. The charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is in custody since 14.02.2026, however, considering the material available on record and the stage of the case, this Court is not 5 inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant – Sunil @ Banu Thakur, involved in Crime No.32/2026, registered at Police Station- Dongargaon, Tahsil- Dongargaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 351(2), 109, 3(5), 191 BNS 2023 and 25 Arms Act, is rejected. 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 Arpan