MILAN YADAV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010308692026 2026:CGHC:38669
NAFR
VAIBHAV
SINGH
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV SINGH
Date: 2026.09.01
16:07:03 +0530
MCRC No. 7351 of 2026
Milan Yadav Son Of Ramnarayan Yadav, Aged About 29 Years Resident Of
Village- Bhatikuda, Police Station- Hardi Bazar, District- Korba (C.G.)
... Applicant

versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, Police Station -
Hardi Bazar, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Non-applicant

For Applicant : Mr. Aashutosh Shukla, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant : Ms. Palak Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board
01.09.2026
This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya
1.
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular
bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime
No. 63/2026 registered at Police Station - Hardibazar, District- Korba
(C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2),
118(2) & 3(5) of the BNS.

2
2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 25.04.2026 at about 10:00
P.M., the marriage procession (Barat) of the complainant Roshan
Yadav’s elder brother Rakesh Yadav was proceeding towards the
Marriage Palace Garden at Village Bhatikuda, Police Station
Hardibazar. The complainant, along with his friends namely Brijpal,
Ashish, Khusro and Santosh Patel, had consumed liquor. While they
were near Krishna Chowk, Village Bhatikuda, a dispute arose between
the complainant and Milan Yadav on account of their drunken
condition, during which they abused each other in filthy language. It is
alleged that the present applicant assaulted the complainant with a
wooden bamboo stick, resulting in injuries to him. The complainant
was admitted to the hospital on 26.04.2026 and was discharged on
27.04.2026. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant,
the present applicant has been booked for the alleged offences
punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is
submitted that although the alleged incident took place on 25.04.2026,
the FIR was lodged only on 02.05.2026 and no satisfactory
explanation has been offered for the delay. The complainant Roshan
Yadav, in his statement recorded by the police, has admitted that the
dispute arose after he had consumed liquor and started abusing and
quarrelling with the present applicant without any reason, whereupon
the applicant, in self-defence, attempted to save himself and assaulted
the complainant with a bamboo stick. As per the medical report
submitted by Govind Institute of Life Care, Bilaspur, the complainant

3
was admitted on 26.04.2026 and discharged on 27.04.2026, while the
CT Scan report reveals no abnormality of the basal cisterns and the
internal capsule appears normal; further, no FSL examination has
been conducted by the prosecution and no blood has been found on
the rod or bamboo stick. It is further submitted that the applicant is
aged about 29 years, has been in judicial custody since 03.07.2026,
and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent
Court. As the trial is likely to take considerable time to conclude and
further incarceration of the applicant would serve no useful purpose,
the applicant may kindly be enlarged on regular bail.
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application
of the present applicant and submitted that the charge-sheet has
already been filed he further submitted that the present applicants
allegedly assaulted the injured, resulting in grievous injuries,
therefore, the present applicant is not entitled to be granted regular
bail in the present case.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused
the case diary.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal
of the case diary, it is observed that the injuries sustained by the
injured are simple in nature and are stated to have been caused on a
non-vital part of the body. It is further noticed that the applicant has no
criminal antecedents. The charge-sheet has already been filed before
the competent Court, and the applicant has been in judicial custody
since 03.07.2026, this Court is of the considered view that the
applicant has made out a fit case for grant of regular bail. Accordingly,

4
the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case.
7. Let the Applicant - Milan Yadav involved in Crime No. 63/2026
registered at Police Station - Hardibazar, District- Korba (C.G.) for the
offence punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2) & 3(5)
of the BNS, be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two
local sureties 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

5
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.
- Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
vaibhav