Regular bail granted where role is distinguished from co-accused who inflicted specific injuries using lethal weapons.

The applicant filed a First Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) following his arrest on October 25, 2025, in connection with Crime No. 516/2025.

The prosecution alleged that on October 24, 2025, several individuals in a Maruti Suzuki WagonR assaulted the complainant and his friends near Durg.

While co-accused Nohar Yadav and Aman Yadav allegedly inflicted serious knife wounds on the victims' chest, abdomen, and thighs, the applicant was accused of general assault using hands and fists.

The applicant argued that he was not named in the FIR, no weapons were seized from him, and he had been incarcerated for five months.

The State opposed bail, citing the applicant’s two criminal antecedents.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023, given that his role was distinguishable from the main assailants and he was not named in the FIR.

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

The applicant was charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, specifically Sections 296 (Obscene acts), 115(2) (Voluntarily causing hurt), 351(3) (Criminal intimidation), 109 (Abetment), and 3(5) (Joint liability/Common intention).

The Court examined the nature and gravity of the allegations, noting a significant distinction between the applicant’s conduct and that of the co-accused.

It observed that the serious injuries involving sharp-edged weapons were specifically attributed to Nohar Yadav and Aman Yadav, whereas the applicant faced only general allegations of assault by hand and fist.

The Court highlighted that the applicant’s name was missing from the FIR and no incriminating articles were recovered from his possession.

Despite the State’s concerns regarding the applicant’s criminal history, the Court found that his prolonged detention since October 2025 and the likely duration of the trial justified his release.

The applicant was ordered to be released upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to several conditions: (i) he must not seek adjournments when witnesses are present; (ii) he must appear at every hearing or face proceedings under Section 269 of the BNS; and (iii) he must remain present for framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 of the BNSS.