Regular bail granted on parity after charge-sheet filing and prolonged pre-trial custody.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 129/2026 registered at Police Station Dongargarh for offences under Sections 296, 351(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).

The prosecution alleged that, on 13 March 2026, the applicant and three co-accused were consuming liquor at the premises of an old Community Health Centre and abused and threatened the complainant’s sons when they objected.

Co-accused Gajendra @ Gajju allegedly attacked the victims with a knife, causing serious injuries. The knife was allegedly seized from Gajendra during investigation.

The applicant contended that the victims’ statements attributed the knife assault to Gajendra, that no weapon was recovered from him, and that his alleged role was limited to assault with hands and fists.

Co-accused Anil Thapa had already been granted bail. The charge-sheet had been filed, and the applicant had remained in judicial custody since 15 May 2026.

Whether the applicant should be granted regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the allegations and the material collected during investigation.

Whether the applicant was entitled to bail on the ground of parity with co-accused Anil Thapa, along with the filing of the charge-sheet, period of custody and likelihood of delay in trial.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail.

It considered established bail principles, including assessment of the nature and gravity of the accusation, the specific role attributed to the accused, the evidentiary material collected, the period of custody, the filing of the charge-sheet, the likelihood of the trial taking considerable time, and parity with similarly situated co-accused.

The alleged offences were under Sections 296, 351(2), 109 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

The Court considered that the principal allegation of knife assault was directed against co-accused Gajendra @ Gajju, from whom the knife was allegedly recovered, whereas no weapon was seized from the applicant.

The material referred to by the applicant also attributed the knife attack to Gajendra.

The Court further noted that co-accused Anil Thapa, stated to be similarly situated, had already been granted bail.

Since the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicant had been in custody since 15 May 2026, and the trial was likely to take considerable time, the Court concluded that continued detention was not warranted despite the nature and gravity of the allegations.

The Court directed that Ajay Mandavi be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

Bail was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial Court on scheduled dates, to comply with proceedings relating to non-appearance or misuse of bail, and to appear personally on the dates fixed for opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of his statement under Section 351 of the BNSS.