Grant of Bail Where Injuries Lack Evidence of Fatality and Charge-Sheet Is Filed.

The applicant filed a first bail application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, following his arrest on November 3, 2025, for offenses under Sections 333, 309(4), and 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The prosecution alleged that on September 29, 2025, the applicant (identified by the victim as "Shiva Nai") entered the victim's house, assaulted her with a sharp weapon (razor/knife) with intent to kill, and robbed her of silver anklets.

The applicant contended he was falsely implicated, noting a discrepancy in names, a lack of recovered stolen property, and 60% permanent disability in his left limb.

Medical reports indicated lacerated wounds but no internal damage or fractures.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail considering the nature of the injuries and the progress of the investigation.

The court applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant bail.

Substantively, the court considered the elements of Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code (attempt to murder, now BNS equivalent) regarding the sufficiency of injury to cause death.

It also considered the procedural principle that bail may be granted when the charge-sheet has been filed and the trial is expected to take significant time.

The Court examined the medical evidence and observed that while the prosecution characterized the injuries as grievous, the CT scans of the neck and brain revealed no fractures or internal damage.

Consequently, the Court found a lack of prima facie material to indicate that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, a necessary ingredient for more severe charges.

The Court further balanced the severity of the allegations against the facts that the applicant has no prior criminal record, the charge-sheet has already been filed, and he has been in custody since November 3, 2025.

The Court determined that continued incarceration was not necessary as the trial's conclusion would take time.

The holding was conditioned upon the applicant not seeking unnecessary adjournments, appearing at all trial dates (specifically for framing of charges and recording statements), and complying with Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS in the event of default or misuse of liberty.

The Court directed a certified copy of the order to be sent to the trial court for immediate compliance.