[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Yuvraj @ Deep Singh Rajput vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 17 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12704
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2487 of 2026
Yuvraj @ Deep Singh Rajput S/o Rajkishore Aged About 21 Years R/o
Bajrang Chowk, Tulsipur, Police Station Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon
(C.G.)
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer Police Station
Digitally
AKHILESH signed by
Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
KUMAR AKHILESH
DEWANGAN KUMAR
DEWANGAN
... Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shailendra Sharma, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
17/03/2026
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. 742/2025 registered at Police Station
Kotwali, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable
under Sections 119(1), 351(2), 3(5) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27
of Arms Act.
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 03.12.2025 at about
10:30 PM, the complainant, Prakash Rajput, after closing his shop,
was returning home when accused Yuvraj Singh along with other co-
accused persons intercepted him, threatened him with a knife and
demanded Rs.10,000/-. Upon his refusal, they allegedly snatched
his mobile phone and assaulted him with hands, fists, sticks and a
knife, causing injuries. It is further alleged that the complainant was
wrongfully confined throughout the night and threatened with dire
consequences. On the basis of a written complaint, Crime No.
742/2025 has been registered at Police Station Kotwali, District
Rajnandgaon for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and
the Arms Act. 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 the injuries sustained by the
injured were caused by a sharp-edged weapon, i.e., a knife, which
was seized from the possession of the co-accused, Lokesh Yadav
and in contrast, a wooden stick (danda) has been seized from the
possession of the present applicant, and as per the MLC report, no
injury attributable to the said wooden stick has been found on the
person of the injured. The applicant is in jail since 09.12.2025, the
applicant has three criminal antecedents of the years 2022, 2023
and 2024, out of which in case of 2022 applicant has already been
acquitted vide judgment dated 28.10.2024 and rest of the two cases
are pending, further 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. He further submits that the applicant along with other
co-accused persons, allegedly intercepted the complainant,
threatened him with a knife, demanded money, and upon refusal,
assaulted him with hands, fists, sticks and a knife, caused grievous
injuries to the injured, and also participated in snatching his mobile
phone and wrongfully confining and threatening him. Furthermore,
the applicant has three criminal antecedents of the years 2022, 2023
and 2024, 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 05.09.2023, the fact that though the applicant along with other
co-accused persons, allegedly intercepted the complainant,
threatened him with a knife, demanded money, and upon refusal,
assaulted him with hands, fists, sticks and a knife, caused grievous
injuries to the injured, but considering the fact that the injuries
sustained by the injured were caused by a sharp-edged weapon,
i.e., a knife, which was seized from the possession of the co-
accused, Lokesh Yadav and in contrast, a wooden stick (danda) has
been seized from the possession of the present applicant, and as
per the MLC report, no injury attributable to the said wooden stick
has been found on the person of the injured, hence, the case of
present applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused, Lokesh
Yadav, who assaulted the injured by knife, also considering the
criminal antecedents of the applicant, which are three in number of
the years 2022, 2023 and 2024, out of which, in case of 2022
applicant has already been acquitted vide judgment dated
28.10.2024 and rest of the two cases are pending, 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-Yuvraj @ Deep Singh Rajput, involved in Crime
No. 742/2025 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District
Rajnandgaon (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections
119(1), 351(2), 3(5) of BNS and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 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
