Prima facie absence of intent in rear-end collisions justifies grant of regular bail under BNS.

The applicant, Semendra Yadav, was the driver of a "Hiwa" vehicle (Registration No. CG 04 LS 9146) involved in a fatal road accident with a motorcycle

The collision resulted in the immediate death of two children, Bhumika Banjare and Sumit Dhiwar, and injuries to a third child, Sanoj Sonkar

Following a written complaint by the father of the deceased girl, FIR No. 508/2025 was registered at Police Station Bhilai-3 for various offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)

The applicant was arrested on January 30, 2026, and remained in judicial custody while the investigation was completed and the charge-sheet (challan) was filed

The applicant sought regular bail, contending that the motorcyclist negligently collided with the rear of his vehicle and that he lacked any intention to cause the accident

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) considering the nature of the accident, the lack of criminal antecedents, and the filing of the charge-sheet?

The court primarily applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which governs the High Court's power to grant regular bail

The substantive offences were registered under Sections 281 (Rash driving), 125-A (Causing hurt by act endangering life), 125-B (Causing grievous hurt), and 105 (Culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

The court also applied procedural mandates regarding trial attendance under Sections 209 (Non-appearance), 269 (Attendance of persons confined), and 351 (Recording of statement) of the BNS/BNSS framework

The Court evaluated the case diary and the specific circumstances of the collision. It noted that the motorcycle had struck the rear side of the offending vehicle, which prima facie indicated an absence of intent on the part of the applicant to cause the accident

The Court observed that the investigation was complete and the charge-sheet had already been submitted before the competent court, meaning the applicant’s custody was no longer required for investigative purposes

Furthermore, the Court took into account that the applicant had no previous criminal antecedents and that the trial was likely to take significant time to conclude

Balancing the gravity of the allegations against the applicant’s clean record and the procedural status of the case, the Court found that continued incarceration was not warranted

The Court held that the lack of prima facie intent and the completion of the charge-sheet justified the grant of bail

The release was made subject to strict conditions, including: (i) a prohibition on seeking adjournments during evidence; (ii) mandatory presence on all trial dates; and (iii) strict adherence to procedures under Sections 209 and 269 of the BNS in case of default or misuse of liberty