Bail Granted Where Victim Refused Medical Examination to Ascertain Nature of Alleged Life-Threatening Injuries

The applicants (Dashrath Sahu, Preetlal Sahu, and Brijlal Sahu) were arrested in connection with Crime No. 02/2026 at P.S. Pithora for allegedly assaulting the complainant and his brother with wooden sticks on January 1, 2026, due to an old family dispute.

The prosecution alleged that the victim sustained serious injuries to the nose and head.

The applicants filed their first bail application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, contending false implication due to personal enmity and noting that Applicant No. 1 is a senior citizen.

The applicants have been in custody since January 22, 2026.

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to the grant of regular bail considering the nature of the allegations, the medical evidence, and the duration of their incarceration.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the power to grant bail.

Sections 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt), 127(1) (wrongful restraint), 296 (obscenity), 3(5) (joint liability), 351(3) (criminal intimidation), and 109 (attempt to murder) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

Offences are not punishable by death or life imprisonment.

Procedural status under BNSS Sections 269 (non-attendance), 84 (proclamation for person absconding), and 209 (failure to appear).

The Court weighed the prosecution's allegations against the fact that the charge-sheet had already been filed before the competent court.

A critical factor in the court’s reasoning was the State counsel's admission that the injured person had refused to undergo a medical examination to ascertain the exact nature and gravity of the injuries.

The Court further noted that the applicants had already spent over three months in custody (since Jan 22, 2026) and that the trial's conclusion would likely take a considerable amount of time.

In light of these factors—lack of medical confirmation of life-threatening injury and the completion of the investigation (filing of charge-sheet)—the Court determined that continued incarceration was not warranted.

The holding directed their release upon furnishing personal bonds with two sureties each, subject to conditions including: (i) no seeking of adjournments during witness presence; (ii) mandatory attendance on trial dates per Section 269 of BNS; and (iii) personal presence during charges and statements under Section 351 of BNSS.