Chattisgarh High Court
Mohd. Shahid vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12117
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2385 of 2026
Mohd. Shahid S/o Mohd. Aakhir Aged About 20 Years R/o Gali No. 04,
Kanshiram Nagar, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station
Telibandha, District Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate.
Digitally AKHILESH signed by For Respondent(s) : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer.
KUMAR AKHILESH
DEWANGAN KUMAR
DEWANGAN
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
13/03/2026
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 applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 445/2024 registered at Police Station Telibandha, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 324, 327 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the complainant lodged a report at the concerned Police Station stating that on the date of the incident a dispute arose between the accused persons and 2 the injured person on account of previous enmity. It is alleged that thereafter the accused persons assaulted the injured person with a blade, as a result of which the injured sustained injuries on his neck and hand. On the basis of the said report, the concerned Police Station registered an offence punishable under Sections 294, 324 and 327 of the I.P.C. against the present applicant and other co-accused persons. Hence, the bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in offence in question. He further submits that at the time of the alleged incident, a minor dispute had arisen between the parties on account of previous enmity, however, the present applicant has not committed any of the aforesaid offences as alleged by the prosecution. He also submits that the injury sustained by the injured is simple in nature. The applicant is in jail since 02.07.2025, the applicant has no criminal antecedent, charge- sheet has been filed and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She further submits that due to previous enmity, a dispute arose between the parties and the applicant along with other co-accused persons allegedly assaulted the injured person with a blade, as a result of which the injured sustained injuries on 3 his neck and hand. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled for grant of 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 02.07.2025, the fact that though allegedly due to previous enmity, a dispute arose between the parties and the applicant along with other co-accused persons allegedly assaulted the injured person with a blade, as a result of which the injured sustained injuries on his neck and hand, but considering the fact that the injury sustained by the injured is found to be simple in nature and the applicant has no criminal antecedent, further the charge-sheet has been filed, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
7. Accordingly, the application is allowed.
8. Let the Applicant-Mohd. Shahid, involved in Crime No. 445/2024 registered at Police Station Telibandha, District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 324, 327 of the Indian Penal Code, 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 applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 4 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 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.
Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha) CHIEF JUSTICE Akhil