Regular bail granted where accused were unnamed in FIR, lacked antecedents, and charge-sheet was filed.

The applicants filed their first application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 297/2026 registered at Police Station Sakri, Bilaspur, for offences under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109(1), 191(2) and 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

The prosecution alleged that, on 6 April 2026, the complainant’s neighbours abused and assaulted his family members with sticks, an axe, a sickle, fists and hands, causing injuries that required treatment at CIMS, Bilaspur

The applicants contended that they were not named in the FIR, had no criminal antecedents, were implicated only on the basis of memorandum statements, and had been in custody since 27 June 2026.

They further submitted that the charge-sheet had been filed and that the parties were residents of the same locality

The State opposed the application, although it acknowledged that the charge-sheet had been filed

Whether the applicants were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in view of the allegations and material collected during investigation

Whether the applicants’ non-mention in the FIR, absence of criminal antecedents, filing of the charge-sheet and period of judicial custody justified their release on bail

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail to a person accused of an offence and in custody

In deciding bail, the Court considered the nature of the allegations, the material available in the case diary, whether the accused were named in the FIR, their criminal antecedents, completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, and the period of custody

The Court also imposed conditions regulating attendance, non-seeking of unnecessary adjournments, personal appearance at material stages of trial, and consequences for misuse of bail

After examining the case diary, the Court weighed the allegations against the circumstances favouring release.

Although the prosecution alleged a group assault involving dangerous weapons and injuries to the victims, the applicants were not named in the FIR, had no previous criminal antecedents, and were stated to have been implicated on the basis of memorandum statements.

Since the investigation was complete, the charge-sheet had been filed, and the applicants had remained in judicial custody since 27 June 2026, the Court found that continued detention was not warranted at that stage

The Court therefore held that the applicants were entitled to bail, subject to safeguards designed to ensure their attendance and prevent misuse of the liberty granted

Applicant Nos. 1 and 2, Smt. Vandana Bare and Yogesh Baghel, were directed to be released on regular bail upon furnishing personal bonds with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court

The release was subject to conditions requiring attendance before the trial court, no unnecessary adjournments when witnesses were present, personal appearance at the opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statements, and compliance with proceedings arising from misuse of bail or non-appearance

A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the trial court for necessary compliance