Bail Granted in Land Dispute Case as Criminal Proceeding Arising from Civil Litigation Suggests Malafide Intent

The applicant filed a First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking regular bail following his arrest on November 23, 2025.

The prosecution alleged that on November 22, 2025, during a land demarcation dispute at Luchki Ghat, the applicant and co-accused physically assaulted the complainant with sticks, causing injuries.

The applicant contended that the matter was a civil dispute regarding land possession currently stayed by the Commissioner, Sarguja.

Cross-FIRs were lodged by both parties, and the charge-sheet has been filed.

The applicant remains in judicial custody while having two previous criminal antecedents.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail considering the civil nature of the underlying dispute and the current stage of investigation.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the grant of regular bail.

The charges against the applicant include Sections 119(3), 296(B), 351(3), 115(2), 111(2)(B), 324(4), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

The court also applied the principle that the presence of criminal antecedents does not automatically bar bail if they are sufficiently explained or if the current dispute appears mala-fide.

The court observed that the incident was rooted in a "purely civil dispute" regarding the demarcation and possession of land, noting that the Commissioner, Sarguja had stayed the relevant demarcation proceedings prior to the altercation.

The court took into account that the charge-sheet has already been filed, meaning custodial interrogation is no longer required.

Regarding the applicant's two criminal antecedents, the court found their explanation in the application satisfactory and noted that the State failed to provide additional requested information from Haryana despite being granted time.

Considering the applicant has been in jail since November 23, 2025, and the occurrence appeared spontaneous rather than planned, the court determined that the applicant met the criteria for release.

The holding is subject to conditions including: (i) non-seeking of adjournments during evidence; (ii) mandatory appearance on trial dates; and (iii) strict compliance with Sections 269 and 209 of the BNS regarding presence and non-proclamation.

The Court held that the civil nature of the dispute and the filing of the charge-sheet outweighed the State's opposition based on antecedents.