MANOJ KUMAR YADAV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1


2026:CGHC:21644
NAFR
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally
signed by
KUNAL
DEWANGAN
MCRC No. 4283 of 2026
1 - Manoj Kumar Yadav S/o Late Suresh Yadav Aged About 39 Years
R/o Village Dutkaiya (Khapri), P.S. Rajim, Distt. Gariabandh,
Chhattisgarh.
2 - Kiran Yadav S/o Bisambhar Yadav Aged About 31 Years R/o Village
Dutkaiya (Khapri), P.S. Rajim, Distt. Gariabandh, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Dagge @ Dageshwar Yadav S/o Late Ramesh Yadav Aged About 28
Years R/o Village Dutkaiya (Khapri), P.S. Rajim, Distt. Gariabandh,
Chhattisgarh.
4 - Rakesh Kumar Sahu S/o Bharatlal Sahu Aged About 31 Years R/o
Village Dutkaiya (Khapri), P.S. Rajim, Distt. Gariabandh, Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant(s)
versus
State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. Rajim,
Distt. Gariabandh, Chhattisgarh.
... Non-Applicant(s)
For Applicants : Mr. Siddharth Pandey, Advocate.
For Non-Applicant/State : Ms. Smriti Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer.
Hon’ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
Order on Board

2
08.05.2026
1 The applicants have preferred this First Bail Application under
Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for
grant of regular bail, as they have been arrested in connection with
Crime No.31/2026, registered at Police Station – Rajim, District-
Gariaband (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 296,
115(2), 351(3), 332(b), 332(c), 109(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 326(g),
238,117(2), 118(2) of BNS.
2 The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that a Dehati Nalishi was
lodged by the complainant, namely, Kasmuddin Quraishi @ Raju
Khan, on 02.02.2026 at about 13:30 hours, to the effect that he is a
matriculation pass and is engaged in the business of property
dealing. It was further alleged that his neighbour, namely, Aarif
Khan, was sent to jail for breaking and damaging a Shivaling, and
after being released from jail, he created a ruckus in the village by
assaulting the villagers of Village Dutkaiya and nearby villagers of
Village Parsada on the intervening night of 31.01.2026 and
01.02.2026. It was further alleged that, on account of the said
ruckus, the villagers became annoyed on 01.02.2026. It has also
been alleged that the villagers/victims of the assault and ruckus
caused by Aarif Khan surrounded the complainant and his family
members, damaged his house, and abused him in filthy language
when the complainant and his family members attempted to restrain
them. It was further alleged that the villagers, namely, Bhupendra
Sahu, Upendra Sahu, Amar Sahu, Bholashankar Sahu, Karan
Patel, and other residents of Village Dutkaiya (Khapri), in

3
furtherance of their common intention, committed marpeet with the
complainant and caused injuries by means of knife, rod, and stick,
and also set ablaze the articles kept in the house as well as the
vehicles. It was further alleged that the neighbours of the
complainant, namely, Anwar Khan and Balla @ Amjad Khan, were
also assaulted by the miscreants and that their houses and vehicles
were also set on fire. It was also alleged that the accused persons,
namely, Bhupendra Sahu, Upendra Sahu, Amar Singh Sahu, Bhola
Shankar Sahu, Karan Patel, and other persons assaulted the
complainant by using iron rods and bricks, which caused injuries to
the police personnel who were escorting the complainant and other
victims from the place of occurrence. On the basis of the aforesaid
allegations, an FIR bearing Crime No. 31/2026 was registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3),
332(b), 332(c), 109(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), and 326(g) of the
B.N.S. A copy of the FIR bearing Crime No. 31/2026 is marked and
annexed herewith as ANNEXURE A/2. That, after completion of the
investigation, the charge-sheet was filed on 07.04.2026 against 22
accused persons, whereas 8 accused persons are still absconding
and have not yet been apprehended by the police.
It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant in the
present case, namely, Kasmuddin Quraishi @ Raju Khan, has a
nephew, namely, Aarif Khan. Earlier, an FIR had been registered
against Aarif Khan and his associates for damaging and breaking
the Shivaling. The said Aarif Khan, along with his associates, after
being released on bail in the said crime, committed marpeet with

4
various persons and caused injuries to them on the allegation that
he had been sent to jail by Hindus for breaking and damaging the
Shivaling. It is pertinent to mention here that, for the aforesaid acts,
three different crime numbers were registered against Aarif Khan
and his associates at Police Station Rajim, District Gariyabandh,
Chhattisgarh, bearing Crime No. 01/2026 dated 01.02.2026 [for
offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 3(5), and 351(3)
of the BNS], Crime No. 25/2026 dated 01.02.2026 [for offences
punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 296, 3(5), and 351(3)],
and Crime No. 26/2026 dated 01.02.2026 [for offences punishable
under Sections 331(2), 309(6), 296, 115(2), 351(3), and 3(5)]. It is
further pertinent to mention that the entire incident is attributable to
Aarif Khan, on account of whose actions the alleged incident took
place. Aarif Khan initially created a ruckus in the concerned village
and thereafter committed marpeet and caused injuries to the
residents of the village. Being aggrieved and provoked by the
aforesaid actions of Aarif Khan, the alleged incident subsequently
took place, which is also evident from the contents of the FIR
lodged by the complainant himself.
3 Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are
innocent villagers and have falsely been implicated in the present
case by the police. It is further submitted that the applicants were
arrested on 01.04.2026 and the charge-sheet has already been filed
on 07.04.2026, therefore, their further custodial interrogation is not
required. It is also submitted that the conclusion of the trial is likely
to take considerable time inasmuch as there are as many as 81

5
prosecution witnesses cited in the charge-sheet and, till date,
charges have not yet been framed against the accused persons. He
further submits that prima facie no offence under the aforesaid
sections is made out against the present applicants and that the
complainant, namely, Kasmuddin Qureshi @ Raju Khan, has not
levelled any specific allegation against the applicants in his police
statement. It is further submitted that the police have allegedly
seized only one steel pipe from applicant No.1 and bamboo sticks
from applicants No.2 to 4. He also submits that the entire incident is
attributable to Aarif Khan, who initially created a ruckus in the
concerned village and thereafter committed marpeet and caused
injuries to the residents of the village, due to which the alleged
incident subsequently took place, as is also evident from the
contents of the FIR lodged by the complainant himself. It is further
submitted that the applicants are young men and their prolonged
detention would seriously prejudice their career, reputation, and
future prospects. Lastly, it is submitted that continued incarceration
of the applicants would cause undue hardship to their respective
families, especially when the investigation has already been
completed and the charge-sheet has been filed before the
competent Court further the applicant No.2 has only one criminal
antecedents as explained the bail application and rest applicants
have no criminal antecedents. Accordingly, he prays for grant of
bail.
4 Learned counsel for the applicant further submit that the
memorandum statement of the present applicant was recorded in

6
crime in questions as per which he helped the accused persons to
get account of one Karan Sindhi but neither the account was seized
nor any other thing was seized from the present applicant which
shows that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in
crime in question. He also submits that some of the other co-
accused persons have been granted bail by this Court on the
ground of nature and gravity of allegation and the fact that the
applicant's documents have been fraudulently used by prosecution,
he has no knowledge about the case and he has not gained single
pie from anyone and detention period of the accused in MCRC No.
2118, 3774, 3966, 4071, 4103, 4137, 4148, 4182, 4039 of 2025
vide orders dated 08.05.2025, 13.05.2025, 20.05.2025,
27.05.2025, 29.05.2025 and 20.06.2025, therefore, the present
applicant is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of
parity and the present applicant is in jail since 11.04.2025 and trial
is likely to take quite long time for its conclusion, therefore, he prays
for grant of bail.
5
On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer for
grant of bail and submits that the bail applications preferred by the
co-accused persons, namely, Gulshan Kumar Sahu, Narendra
Sahu, Manish Sahu, and Piyush Sahu @ Pintu, have already been
rejected by this Court on merits in MCRC No. 4277/2026 vide order
dated 07.05.2026. It is further submitted that the bail applications of
other co-accused persons, namely, Ishwar Sahu, Amarsingh Sahu,
Manoj Kumar Sahu, and Vicky @ Vyanktesh Sahu, have also been
rejected by this Court in MCRC No. 4282/2026 vide order dated

7
07.05.2026. It is further submitted that the case of the present
applicants stands on similar footing to that of the aforesaid co-
accused persons whose bail applications have already been
rejected and therefore, the present applicants are also not entitled
to be enlarged on bail.
6 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
documents available on record.
7 Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case,
particularly the serious and grave nature of the allegations against
the applicants, their active participation in the unlawful assembly,
assault on the complainant, his family members and Police
personnel, as well as the allegations of arson and destruction of
property, this Court is not inclined to extend the benefit of regular
bail to the applicants and also considering the fact that the bail
applications preferred by the co-accused persons, namely, Gulshan
Kumar Sahu, Narendra Sahu, Manish Sahu, and Piyush Sahu @
Pintu, have already been rejected by this Court on merits in MCRC
No. 4277/2026 vide order dated 07.05.2026 and the bail
applications of other co-accused persons, namely, Ishwar Sahu,
Amarsingh Sahu, Manoj Kumar Sahu, and Vicky @ Vyanktesh
Sahu, have also been rejected by this Court in MCRC No.
4282/2026 vide order dated 07.05.2026, further the case of the
present applicants stands on similar footing to that of the aforesaid
co-accused persons whose bail applications have already been
rejected by this Court. Therefore, looking to the gravity of the

8
offence and the manner in which it was allegedly committed, I am
not inclined to grant bail to the applicants.
8
Accordingly, the bail application of the applicants – Manoj Kumar
Yadav, Kiran Yadav, Dagge @ Dageshwar Yadav and Rakesh
Kumar Sahu, involved in Crime No.31/2026, registered at Police
Station – Rajim, District- Gariaband (C.G.) for the offence
punishable under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 332(b), 332(c),
109(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 326(g), 238,117(2), 118(2) of BNS., is
rejected.
9 Needless to say that the trial Court concerned is at liberty to
proceed and conclude the trial expeditiously.
10 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
Kunal