Bail was denied to the alleged assault planner but granted to a co-accused.

The applicants sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in a case registered for offences under Sections 296, 351(3), 109(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution alleged that applicant No. 1 arranged and participated in an assault on the complainant, who sustained multiple fractures to his leg; the complainant also alleged that a pistol was put to his head.

The applicants disputed the allegations, submitted that only a toy gun had been seized, and relied on a co-accused’s bail and the expected length of trial.

The State opposed bail, citing the injury evidence and applicant No. 1’s criminal antecedents; applicant No. 2 had one antecedent.

This was the applicants’ second bail application.

Whether applicant No. 1, Rajjak Ali, should be released on regular bail in light of the alleged planned assault, the injuries, and his criminal antecedents.

Whether applicant No. 2, Amit Choudhari, should be released on regular bail, having regard to his custody, the filing of the charge-sheet, and his criminal antecedent.

Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, empowers the High Court to consider an application for regular bail.

The Court assessed the applications by reference to the circumstances of the alleged offence, the nature of the allegations, the injury evidence, custody and charge-sheet status, and the applicants’ criminal antecedents.

No precedent was cited.

The Court considered the prosecution’s account against applicant No. 1 to indicate a planned and intentional assault: he allegedly took the complainant to the petrol pump, summoned armed associates, directed the assault, and participated in it, resulting in multiple fractures.

In light of the alleged manner of commission and applicant No. 1’s antecedents, the Court declined bail.

As to applicant No. 2, the Court relied on his custody since 15 June 2026, the filing of the charge-sheet, and the existence of only one criminal antecedent, and granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits.

Applicant No. 2 was ordered released on a bond of ₹25,000 with one surety for the like sum, subject to conditions concerning attendance, adjournments, and personal appearance at specified trial stages.

A certified copy was directed to be sent to the trial court.