[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Krishna Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 12 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:11986
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 1187 of 2026
Krishna Yadav S/o Dayashankar Aged About 35 Years R/o Village- Trishuli,
P/S Sanawal, Distt.- Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.)
.. Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Sanawal, Distt.- Balrampur-
Ramanujganj (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate.
Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.
Digitally
signed by
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
ABHISHEK
ABHISHEK SHRIVAS
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.03.13
11:35:08
+0530
Order on Board
12.03.2026
1.
The applicant has preferred this First Bail Application under Section 483
of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail,
as he has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 81/2025,
registered at Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 115(2), 126(2), 296,
304(2), 324(5), 351(2), 75 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, on 23.12.2025, the complainant
Neeraj Kumar made a complaint before Police Station Sanawal, alleging
inter alia that on 23.12.2025 at about 6:00-7:00 PM, the complainant
along with Ranju Singh, Shubham Singh, Surja Singh, Roshani Singh,
Shyamdev Singh, Gauri Shankar Singh, and the driver were going to
village Trishuli to attend the Chhatthi ceremony of Satyanarayan Singh.
When they reached near village Madrutola, the accused persons, namely
Krishna Yadav, Ravi Yadav, Pawan Yadav, and Dinesh Yadav, arrived
on a motorcycle and attempted to stop and chase the vehicle of the
complainant. Thereafter, the accused persons allegedly chased the
complainant's vehicle and committed marpit (assault) with the driver.
When the complainant objected, the accused persons allegedly
threatened to commit murder, snatched the gold chain from the neck of
Ranju Singh, and attempted to outrage her modesty. The incident was
then communicated telephonically to Gauri Shankar by the complainant.
Thereafter, the complainant along with Ujjwal proceeded towards the
place of occurrence, but the accused persons again stopped them
midway, assaulted them while using filthy language, and broke the glass
of their car. Subsequently, upon receiving information through mobile
phone, Ashok Singh and Suryapratap Singh reached the place of the
incident. Thereafter, the accused persons allegedly assaulted them with
lathi and danda and also abused them on caste-based grounds. On the
basis of the said complaint, the First Information Report was registered
by the police of Police Station Sanawal in connection with Crime No.
81/2025.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant is an
innocent person who has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits
that the actual facts of the case are that there was a dispute between
both the parties regarding giving side on the road, due to which a quarrel
took place between them. As a result of the said incident, the present
applicant had also made a complaint on 23.12.2025 before the Police of
Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). He also
submits that the complainant party has falsely narrated the story, and by
misusing their political influence, they have lodged the First Information
Report against the present applicant under the alleged offences. He also
submits that the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. He
submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted in the present
case before the competent Court and the applicant has been in jail since
24.12.2025, conclusion of the trial may take some time, therefore, he
prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of
the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has not 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 further from perusal of the order-sheet dated
04.02.2026, the bail application was earlier adjourned for four weeks in
view of the period of detention, and also that the charge-sheet has
already been filed which is taken on record, the applicant has been in
custody since 24.12.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take
time, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on
bail.
7. Let the applicant - Krishna Yadav, involved in Crime No. 81/2025,
registered at Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Section 115(2), 126(2), 296,
304(2), 324(5), 351(2), 75 and 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 applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that
he 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 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 his 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 his, 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.
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
