[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Ravi Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 March, 2026
Author: Ramesh Sinha
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
1
2026:CGHC:12961
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 2535 of 2026
1.
Ravi Yadav S/o Ruplal Yadav Aged About 22 Years R/o Village- Trishuli,
P/s Sanawal, Distt.- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.)
2. Pawan Yadav S/o Lakhraj Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village-
Trishuli, P/s Sanawal, Distt.- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.)
3. Dinesh Yadav S/o Asharfi Yadav Aged About 27 Years R/o Village
Dumarpan, P/s- Sanawal, Distt.- Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.)
... Applicants
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station Sanawal, Distt.- Balrampur-
Ramanujganj (C.G.)
... Non-applicant
Digitally
signed by
PREETI For Applicants : Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate.
PREETI KUMARI
KUMARI Date:
2026.03.19 For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ankita Shukla, Panel Lawyer.
10:48:44
+0530
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
18.03.2026
1. The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under Section
483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular
bail, as they have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 81/2025,
registered at Police Station Sanawal, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 296,
304(2), 324(5), 351(2) and 75 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 applicants submits that the present applicants are
innocent persons and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It
is further submitted that, in fact, a dispute arose between both the parties
regarding giving way on the road, which led to a quarrel between them.
During the said incident, the complainant party also assaulted the
applicants, and in this regard, the applicants had lodged a complaint on
23.12.2025 before the Police at Police Station Sanawal, District
Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). Learned counsel further submits that the
co-accused, namely, Krishna Yadav, has already been granted bail by
this Court vide order dated 12.03.2026 passed in MCRC No. 1187/2026.
It is also submitted that applicant Nos. 1 and 2 have one previous criminal
antecedent each, whereas applicant No. 3 has no criminal antecedent. It
is further submitted that the charge-sheet has already been filed before
the competent Court. Applicant Nos. 1 and 3 are in judicial custody since
24.12.2025, and applicant No. 2 is in custody since 26.12.2025. The
conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time. Therefore, a prayer has
been made for grant of regular bail to the applicants.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the bail application of
the present applicant and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed
before the competent Court but could not dispute the fact that the
co-accused person has already been granted bail by this 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 the fact that co-accused, namley, Krishna
Yadav has already been granted by this Court vide order dated
12.03.2026 passed in MCRC No. 1187/2026, further the present
applicant Nos. 1 and 2 has one previous criminal antecedents and
applicant No.3 has no criminal antecedents, and also that the
charge-sheet has already been filed, applicant Nos. 1 and 3 have been in
jail since 24.12.2025 and applicant No.2 has been in jail since
26.12.2025, and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take time, I am of the
opinion that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail on the
ground of parity.
7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Nos. 1, 2
and 3 - Ravi Yadav, Pawan Yadav and Dinesh Yadav, respectively
involved in Crime No. 81/2025, registered at Police Station Sanawal,
District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under
Sections 115(2), 126(2), 296, 304(2), 324(5), 351(2) and 75 of the
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 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 misuses the liberty of bail
during trial and in order to secure their 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 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 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
them 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
Preeti
