[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
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
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
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
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
