01Facts
The applicants sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with Crime No. 259/2026, registered for offences under Sections 296, 115(2), 109 and 324 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
¶ 1The prosecution alleged that, on 15 August 2026, the applicants and a juvenile assaulted Rahil and Siddhant with an iron rod, a wooden club and a metal bangle. The applicants were arrested on 20 August 2026, and the charge-sheet had been filed by the time their applications were considered.
¶ 2–3The applicants relied on the nature of the injuries, the period of custody and the likely duration of trial; the State opposed bail, citing a head injury to Rahil and criminal antecedents of two applicants.
¶ 3–402Issues
i.1. Whether the applicants should be released on regular bail in view of the allegations, the medical reports, their criminal antecedents and the stage of the proceedings.
¶ 3–7ii.2. Whether the applicants’ custody and the likely time required to conclude the trial supported their release on bail.
¶ 703Law Applied
The applications were considered under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which provides the statutory basis for the High Court’s consideration of regular bail.
¶ 1The order cites no precedent or further test for bail; its assessment takes account of the medical evidence, the filing of the charge-sheet, the applicants’ custody, the anticipated duration of trial and their antecedents.
¶ 6–7Provisions in the judgment · 5 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 Section 296Section 115Section 109Section 324
04Reasoning
The Court weighed the allegation that the applicants assaulted two persons with weapons against the MLC reports, which did not disclose life-threatening injuries.
¶ 2, 6It also considered that the charge-sheet had been filed, the applicants had been in custody since 20 August 2026, and trial was likely to take further time.
¶ 7The Court noted the applicants’ differing antecedent records, including that the antecedents had been explained in the applications, and concluded that the circumstances justified bail.
¶ 605Holding
The Court allowed the applications and directed that the applicants be released on bail upon executing personal bonds of ₹50,000 each to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
¶ 8Bail was subject to conditions requiring the applicants to be available for police interrogation when required, not to threaten or induce persons acquainted with the case, and not to act in a manner prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial.
¶ 8The Court clarified that its observations were confined to the bail applications and that the trial Court must decide the case on its own merits.
¶ 8Original Court PDF
DEVVRATvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
