Bail may be granted when the accused's role is limited to non-deadly assault, no weapon is recovered, the charge-sheet is filed, and the role is less severe than that of co-accused, especially when the trial is expected to take time.

Order on Board

1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Narik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 170/2025 registered at Police Station Sargaon, District- Mungeli (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 296, 115(2), 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 22.10.2025, the complainant Pawan Verma, along with his friends Lucky Sahu and Roshan Yadav, had gone to visit Talagaon. While returning at about 9:30 PM, they stopped near the Sulfa Mahamaya Temple. At that time, Tejeshwar Giri Goswami, on seeing them, began abusing them without any reason. When the complainant objected, Tejeshwar Giri Goswami called his brothers, Bhuvneshwar Giri and Pawan Giri, and all of them together started hurling abuses and threatening to kill them. They also assaulted them with fists and a knife, as a result of which Pawan Verma and Lucky Sahu sustained injuries on their stomachs, while Roshan Yadav sustained an injury to his chest. On the basis of the Zero FIR, a case was registered against the applicant.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that the allegation against the applicant is limited to assaulting the injured persons with hands and fists, whereas the co- accused, namely Bhuvneshwar, is alleged to have caused knife injuries to the injured persons. It is submitted that all three injured persons sustained injuries, out of whom Roshan received a grievous injury and Pawan underwent surgery however, no specific overt act of causing injury by a weapon is attributed to the present applicant. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 23.10.2025, and the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court. It is further submitted that no recovery or seizure has been effected from the present applicant. Considering that the conclusion of the trial is likely to take considerable time, he prays that the applicant be kindly enlarged on bail.

4. Learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that as per the prosecution case, the present applicant actively participated in the incident by assaulting the injured persons with hands and fists, while one of the co-accused used a knife and caused injuries. Though the applicant did not use a deadly weapon but his role in the assault is clearly established. Considering the nature of the incident, the collective participation of the accused persons, and the seriousness of the allegations, he prays that the present applicant is not entitled for grant of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations levelled against the present applicant and the material available on record, it appears that the specific allegation against the applicant is limited to assault by hands and fists only, whereas the serious allegation of causing injury with a knife is attributed to the co- accused-Bhuvneshwar. It also appears that no deadly weapon has been recovered from the present applicant and the case of the applicant is better than the case of co-accused. The applicant has been in judicial custody for a considerable period, the charge-sheet has already been filed and the trial is likely to take time for its conclusion thus, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application