[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Rahul Yadav vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11481
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2082 of 2026
1 - Rahul Yadav S/o Shri Bhanu Ram Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o
Cinema Line, Ward No. 11 Dongargaon, Police Station- Dongargaon,
District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh
2 - Praveen Tiwari S/o Late Shri Rajesh Tiwari Aged About 23 Years R/o
Near Saket Dham, Ward No. 12 Dongargaon, Police Station-
Dongargaon, Chhattisgarh
... Applicant(s)
versus
The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S.-
Dongargaon, Distt.- Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, P.L.
For Objector(s) : Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
10/03/2026
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 applicants who have been arrested in
connection with Crime No. 363/2025 registered at Police Station
Dongargaon, Distt.- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence
punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 191(2), 49, 109 of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (for short 'BNS').
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 21.11.2025 at about
17:53 hours, a written complaint was lodged by Yogesh Kumar
Dewangan stating that on 20.11.2025 at around 8:30 P.M., the
present applicants along with other co-accused persons assaulted
his guests near Gautam Hotel with a rod and a wooden stick
(Balli). It is alleged that the guests had gone there to have betel
(pan), and during that time the complainant questioned Bhanu
Yadav regarding an earlier incident where his son had slapped
him during Ganesh Puja. Upon this, Rahul Yadav and other
accused persons became enraged and assaulted the guests,
causing injuries. It is further alleged that Surendra Navle
sustained injuries on his left hand and head, while other injured
persons also suffered grievous injuries. On the basis of the said
complaint, the aforesaid offences were registered against the
applicants and after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet
has been filed. Hence, the bail application.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants
have not committed any offence and they have been falsely
implicated in offence in question. He further submits that cross-
reports in respect of the same incident have been lodged by both
the parties, and the dispute between them has already been
amicably settled. The applicants are in jail since 21.01.2026, the
applicants have 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 applicants.
4. Learned State Counsel opposes the bail application and submits
that the charge-sheet has been filed in the present case. She
further submits that allegedly the present applicants in collusion
with other co-accused persons assaulted the guests of the
complainant near Gautam Hotel with a rod and a wooden stick
(Balli), due to which the injured, namely, Surendra Navle
sustained injuries. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled for
grant of bail.
5. Learned counsel for the objector submits that he has no objection,
if the present applicant is granted bail. He further submits that the
complainant party has already been granted bail in the FIR lodged
from the side of the present applicant against them.
6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and
perused the case diary.
7. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature and gravity of offence, period of detention of the applicants
since 21.01.2026, the fact that though the applicants allegedly in
collusion with other co-accused persons assaulted the
complainant and others with a rod and a wooden stick (Balli), but
considering the fact that the parties have amicably settled their
dispute and the applicants have no criminal antecedents, further
the charge-sheet has been filed, as such, this Court is of the view
that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.
8. Accordingly, the application is allowed.
9. Let the Applicants-Rahul Yadav and Praveen Tiwari, involved in
Crime No. 363/2025 registered at Police Station Dongargaon,
Distt.- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under
Sections 296, 115(2), 191(2), 49, 109 of BNS, be released on bail
on their furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each 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 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.
10. 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
