KARAN YADAV vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010286242026 2026:CGHC:38668
NAFR
VAIBHAV
SINGH
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV SINGH
Date: 2026.09.01
16:07:02 +0530
MCRC No. 6896 of 2026
1 - Karan Yadav S/o Suresh Ram Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village-
Bhatikuda, Police Station- Hardi Bazar, District- Korba (C.G.)
2 - Shubham Yadav S/o Resham Lal Yadav Aged About 29 Years R/o
Village- Bhatikuda, Police Station- Hardi Bazar, District- Korba (C.G.)
... Applicants

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

For Applicants : 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
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 applicants who have 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 the basis of a complaint
lodged by Roshan Yadav against the present applicants and co-
accused Milan Yadav, it is alleged that on 25.04.2026 at about 10:00
p.m., the marriage procession (Barat) of his elder brother Rakesh
Yadav was proceeding towards Marriage Palace Garden at Village
Bhatikuda, Police Station Hardibazar. The complainant, along with his
friends namely Brijpal, Ashish, Khusro and Santosh Patel, was present
in the said marriage procession and they had consumed liquor. It is
alleged that near Krishna Chowk, Village Bhatikuda, a dispute arose
between the complainant and co-accused Milan Yadav in a drunken
state, during which they abused each other in filthy language and
Milan Yadav allegedly assaulted the complainant with a
wooden/bamboo stick. Consequently, the complainant sustained
injuries and was admitted to the hospital on 26.04.2026, from where
he was discharged on 27.04.2026. On the basis of the said complaint,
the present applicants along with co-accused Milan Yadav were
booked for the 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. The
alleged incident is stated to have occurred on 25.04.2026 at Village
Bhatikuda, whereas the FIR was lodged on 02.05.2026, and no
satisfactory explanation has been furnished by the prosecution for the
delay in lodging the FIR. Further, the complainant Roshan Yadav, in
his statement recorded by the police, has clearly stated that he knew
only Milan Yadav, and the present applicants have neither been
named in the FIR nor identified by the complainant. It is further

3
submitted that, as per the report of Govind Institute of Life Care,
Bilaspur, the complainant was admitted on 26.04.2026 and discharged
on 27.04.2026, and the CT Scan report does not reveal any
abnormality of the basal cisterns and the internal capsule appears
normal. Moreover, no FSL examination has been conducted by the
prosecution and no blood stains were found on the alleged rod and
bamboo stick, thereby creating serious doubt regarding the
prosecution case and the involvement of the present applicants. The
applicants are young persons aged about 25 years and are
engineering students; they are in custody since 03.07.2026, the
charge-sheet has already been filed, and there is no likelihood of the
trial being concluded in the near future. In view of the aforesaid facts
and circumstances, further detention of the applicants would serve no
useful purpose, and therefore, the applicants may kindly be enlarged
on regular bail on such terms and conditions as this Hon’ble Court
4. On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application
of the present applicants 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 applicants are 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

4
non-vital part of the body. It is further noticed that the applicants have
no criminal antecedents. The charge-sheet has already been filed
before the competent Court, and the applicants have been in judicial
custody since 03.07.2026, this Court is of the considered view that the
applicants have made out a fit case for grant of regular bail.
Accordingly, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in the
present case.
7. Let the Applicants - Karan Yadav & Shubham 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 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 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

5
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
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