Bail granted for causing simple hurt to public servant upon filing of the charge-sheet.

On November 25, 2025, the complainant, an election official performing duty for the Election Commission of India, was collecting counting sheets in Ward No. 44, Khursipar

The applicant allegedly obstructed the official work, quarreled with the complainant, and struck him on the head with a brick

The police registered Crime No. 310/2025 under Sections 296, 109, 132, and 121(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

The applicant was arrested on November 26, 2025

Medical examination revealed the victim’s head injury was simple in nature

The applicant disclosed five criminal antecedents, stating he had been acquitted in one and two others were disposed of

The charge-sheet has been filed, and the applicant moved the High Court for regular bail

Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, given the nature of the injuries and the filing of the charge-sheet.

The Court applied Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, regarding the discretionary power to grant regular bail

It considered the gravity of the offenses under Sections 296 (obscene acts), 109 (attempt to murder), 132 (assault to deter public servant), and 121(2) (voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant) of the BNS

The Court relied on the principle that bail may be granted where the injuries are simple, the investigation is complete (evidenced by the filing of a charge-sheet), and the accused has been incarcerated for a significant period pending a lengthy trial

The Court evaluated the gravity of the allegations against the medical evidence and procedural status of the case.

It noted that although the applicant used a weapon (a brick), the resulting injury to the complainant was "simple in nature"

The Court took cognizance of the fact that the applicant had been in judicial custody since November 26, 2025, and that the investigation had concluded with the filing of the charge-sheet

Regarding the applicant's criminal history, the Court found the explanation provided in the application (Paragraph 4A) regarding the status of the five previous cases to be sufficient for the purpose of granting bail at this stage

Recognizing that the trial would likely be protracted, the Court determined that continued pre-trial detention was not warranted

The holding is contingent upon several conditions: the applicant must not seek unnecessary adjournments, must appear on all trial dates, and must personally appear for the framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS

The Court warned that any abuse of bail liberty or failure to appear would authorize the trial court to initiate proceedings under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS and Section 84 of the BNSS