High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 10 CHH CK 1216

Alok Yadav & Anr. vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur · Decided on 5 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
MCRC No. 8642 of 2026 with MCRC No. 9013 of 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 529 words
1.

These are the first bail applications filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicants who have been arrested in connection with Crime No. 468/2026 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District : Korba (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 296, 351(3) and 109 of BNS, 2023.

2.

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 20.05.2026, the present applicants, along with a juvenile, assaulted the complainant’s brother, Roshan Sharma, with hands, fists, a screwdriver, and bricks. Consequently, the victim sustained injuries to his head and upper lip. Following the registration of the FIR, the applicants were arrested on 27.05.2026 and 28.05.2026 respectively.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the respective applicants submit that though charge-sheet has been filed but there is no report/ MLC/ medical opinion available on record describing the nature of injuries sustained by the victim and in absence of medico-legal certificate, it can be presumed that injuries were simple in nature. They further submit that applicant – Alok Yadav has no criminal antecedent whereas applicant – Rinku Yadav has one criminal antecedent pertaining to year 2020. They also submit that applicants have been in jail since 27.05.2026 and conclusion of the trial is likely to take quite long time, therefore they pray for grant of regular bail to the applicants.

4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

5.

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

6.

It is alleged that present applicants, while acting in furtherance of common intention, assaulted Roshan Sharma using hands, fists, a screwdriver, and bricks. However, there is no report/ MLC/ medical opinion to demonstrate the nature of injuries sustained by the victim, therefore it can be presumed that the injuries sustained by the injured were simple in nature. Furthermore, applicant – Alok Yadav has no criminal antecedent whereas applicant – Rinku Yadav has one criminal antecedent pertaining to year 2020.

7.

Taking into consideration the aforesaid discussion coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court and applicants are in jail since 27.05.2026 and 28.05.2026 respectively, conclusion of the trial may take some more time, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case.

8.

It is directed that in the event of the applicants executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court, they shall be released on bail on the following conditions:-

(a)

they shall make themselves available for interrogation by the police officer as and when required;

(b)they shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such fact to the Court; and

(c)

they shall not act in any manner which will be prejudicial to a fair and expeditious trial.

The observation made hereinabove is for the purpose of deciding this bail application only, the learned trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits.