2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 3206
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAVI BAGHEL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
MCRC/994/2026
##PAGE1##
1
2026:CGHC:5057
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 994 of 2026
Ravi Baghel S/o Late Shri Santosh Baghel Aged About 21 Years R/o Ward No.
15, Near Sai Mandir, Dhanora, P.S. Padmanabhpur, Tehsil And District Durg,
Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
State of Chhattisgarh Through OfÏcer-In-Charge of Police Station
Padmanabhpur, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.
... Non-applicant
For Applicant : Mr. R.S. Patel, Advocate.
For Non-applicant/State : Ms. Ritika Verma, Panel Lawyer.
Digitally
signed by
ABHISHEK
ABHISHEK SHRIVAS Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice
SHRIVAS Date:
2026.01.30
12:25:27
+0530 Order on Board
29.01.2026
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant
who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 367/2025 registered
at Police Station – Padmanabhpur, District Durg (C.G.) offence under
Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), 109, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
2. As per the prosecution case, the date of the incident is 19.10.2025 at
about 11:30 P.M., when a sudden quarrel and scufÒe took place between
the present applicant and other co-accused persons on a trivial issue. It
##PAGE2##2
is alleged that during the said quarrel, the complainant arrived at the spot
and got involved in the scufÒe. During the ongoing scufÒe, a friend of the
complainant, namely Prem Yadav, intervened to stop the fight. As a result
thereof, it is alleged that the present applicant inflicted an injury upon the
victim, namely Prem Yadav, with a knife below his ribs. Pursuant thereto,
a report was lodged by the complainant, on the basis of which the
applicant and other co-accused persons were arrested. Thereafter,
Police Station Padmanabhpur, District Durg, registered an offence under
Sections 296, 115(2), 351(3), and 109 read with Section 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in Crime No. 367/25 against the
applicant.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the present
applicant is a young boy, and if he is kept in jail for a longer period in a
false case, his future will be adversely affected. He also submits that the
applicant has been in jail since 20.10.2025 and has already undergone
about three months of incarceration. If he is further incarcerated for a
long period, his family will be adversely affected, as he is the source of
their bread and butter. He further submits that the co-accused person,
namely Parmanand Sahu, has been granted bail by this Court in MCRC
No. 131/2026 vide order dated 08.01.2026. He submits that the medical
report clearly records only superficial and lacerated wounds, and it
further mentions that the victim was conscious. No grievous or life-
threatening injury has been noted. He also submits that the prima facie
medical report does not conclusively establish that the injuries were
inflicted with such force or in such a manner as to attract an offence of
extreme gravity. He submits that the applicant has no criminal
antecedents and he is in jail since 20.10.2025, conclusion of the trial may
take sometime, therefore, he prays for grant of regular bail to the
##PAGE3##3
applicant.
4. On the other hand, the learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the
State/non-applicant opposed the bail application and submitted that the
charge sheet has been filed before the competent Court. She further
submitted that although a co-accused, namely Parmanand Sahu, has
been granted regular bail by this Court in MCRC No. 131 of 2026 vide
order dated 08.01.2026, the case of the present applicant is
distinguishable, as the allegation of assault is specifically against him. It
is alleged that he assaulted the injured with a knife, causing grievous
injury, therefore, he is not entitled to the grant of regular bail in the
present case
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the
case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and
particularly the fact that although the allegation of assault