Regular bail granted where injuries are simple, the charge-sheet is filed, and accused have no criminal antecedents.

The applicants, Karan Yadav and Shubham Yadav, were arrested in connection with Crime No. 63/2026 registered at Police Station Hardibazar, District Korba, for offences under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).

The prosecution alleged that, during a marriage procession on 25 April 2026, a dispute arose between the complainant, Roshan Yadav, and co-accused Milan Yadav, following which the complainant was assaulted with a wooden or bamboo stick and sustained injuries.

The applicants contended that the incident occurred on 25 April 2026 but the FIR was lodged only on 2 May 2026; that the complainant had named only Milan Yadav and had not identified the applicants; and that medical and forensic material did not substantiate their involvement.

They further submitted that they had no criminal antecedents, were young engineering students, had been in custody since 3 July 2026, and that the charge-sheet had already been filed.

Whether the applicants, accused of offences under Sections 296, 115(2), 351(2), 118(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, were entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS?

Whether the nature of the injuries, the applicants’ lack of criminal antecedents, the filing of the charge-sheet, and their period of custody justified 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.

The Court assessed bail on the established considerations of the prima facie material, seriousness and nature of the injuries, criminal antecedents, completion of investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, and the period of custody.

Upon examining the case diary, the Court found that the injuries suffered by the complainant were simple in nature and had been caused on a non-vital part of the body, contrary to the State’s submission regarding grievous injuries.

The Court also noted that the applicants had no criminal antecedents, that the charge-sheet had already been filed, and that they had remained in judicial custody since 3 July 2026.

These circumstances reduced the need for continued custodial detention and led the Court to conclude that the applicants had made out a fit case for regular bail.

Karan Yadav and Shubham Yadav were directed to be released upon furnishing personal bonds with two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

The bail was subject to conditions requiring their cooperation with the trial, appearance on prescribed dates, personal presence at the opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of their statements, and permitting consequential action in the event of misuse of bail or non-appearance.