Regular bail granted where injury was non-vital, charge-sheet filed, and trial likely prolonged despite antecedents.

On 3 May 2026, Parmeshwar Gaharwar was allegedly assaulted near Kilkari Garden, Mahasamund, by two persons who arrived on a motorcycle.

One assailant allegedly demanded money, displayed a knife, took ₹200 from the injured, demanded ₹500, and attempted to stab him.

The injured sustained an injury on his left arm while trying to protect himself.

During investigation, the prosecution alleged that the applicant, Raunak Kumar @ Gabru, and co-accused Deepak Yadav had acted pursuant to a plan and that the injured and his cousin, Neelam Kandoi, identified them during identification proceedings.

The applicant was arrested on 6 May 2026, and the charge-sheet was filed.

He sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 240/2026 registered for offences under Sections 109, 119(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

The prosecution opposed bail on the ground of the seriousness of the allegations, the knife assault, the medical evidence, and the applicant’s three criminal antecedents.

1. Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, considering the nature of the allegations, the medical evidence, the identification proceedings, and his criminal antecedents.

2. Whether the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicant’s period of custody, the non-vital nature of the injury, and the likelihood of delay in trial justified release on bail subject to conditions.

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

It considered the alleged offences under Sections 109, 119(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 25 of the Arms Act.

The governing bail principles applied were the judicial assessment of the nature and gravity of the accusation, the material collected during investigation, the applicant’s criminal antecedents, the stage of the proceedings, the period of incarceration, and the likelihood of an early conclusion of trial.

The Court also imposed statutory and judicial conditions intended to secure the applicant’s presence, prevent delay, and prevent misuse of bail.

The Court acknowledged the allegation that the applicant, along with the co-accused, had demanded money from the injured by displaying a knife and had participated in the assault.

However, it found that the injury recorded in the MLC was on the injured’s left arm, a non-vital part of the body.

The Court also took into account that the investigation had concluded and the charge-sheet had been filed, that the applicant had remained in custody since 6 May 2026, and that the trial was likely to take considerable time.

Although the applicant had three criminal antecedents, the Court noted that they had been explained in the bail application.

Balancing these factors against the prosecution’s objections, the Court held that continued incarceration was not warranted, while safeguarding the trial through conditions requiring attendance, avoidance of unnecessary adjournments, and personal presence at material stages of the proceedings.

Raunak Kumar @ Gabru be released in connection with Crime No. 240/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

The bail was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek adjournments when witnesses were present, to remain present before the trial court on each date, to comply with proceedings arising from any failure to appear, and to remain personally present during opening of the case, framing of charge, and recording of his statement under Section 351 of the BNSS.

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